Re: GAK Flap Happening at a Good Time--Journalists Read!

["James A. Donald" <jamesd@echeque.com>]

At 12:19 AM 12/4/95 GMT, Dan Weinstein wrote:
>I see, you cannot say that they are really supporting GAK based upon
>the actual statements made, so you simply assert it.

You cannot say they oppose it either.  Jim Clark speaks about 
GAK using mostly pleasant sounding favorable words.

Let me hear him talk about GAK using plain words.



>Now given point B, I see no reason to expect that they would in the
>past have done much more than they have.  Given point C, I see they
>are currently expanding their lobbying. 

I do not see that they are currently expanding their lobbying:  Indeed
I do not see that they are currently lobbying.


>I sent a message to Netscape after reading the article that started
>this,  It simply stated that I wanted clarification on their position
>on GAK and that if they were to support it they would lose a loyal
>customer.  I have since been convinced by Jeff Weinstein's posts to
>this list that the company does not support GAK, and in fact they
>oppose it. 

I have been convinced that Jeff Weinstein opposes GAK

If his policy represents company policy then I hope to hear
a similar statement signed authoritatively.


I have not seen that yet.

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
              				|  
We have the right to defend ourselves	|   http://www.jim.com/jamesd/
and our property, because of the kind	|  
of animals that we are. True law	|   James A. Donald
derives from this right, not from the	|  
arbitrary power of the state.		|   jamesd@echeque.com