Theo said that there was refused mail for DR.
Well, I'm not sure if some fruitcake not in any way connected with
OpenBSD mailbombed poor Mr Richardson.
If one did I'm sorry that it happened amd if Mr R. is reading this, and
he should be, he'll know that none of us who chooses OpenBSD condones
that kind of behaviour.
On the other hand he has himself caught in a nice little trap. Why?
Because there are two possibilities for the near future:
a> The documentation requested ( NOT SOURCE TO EXISTING CODE BY
ADAPTEC) is provided.
OR
b> It isn't.
(a) makes him look like a loser because he defended the lack of docs.
That could be because he is the fall guy in the line of fire who has to
defend, come hell or high water, the high ground claimed by TPTB who do
not want their dirt revealed. If this is the case then I hope his
salary package has an allowance for "unpleasant duties". <heh!>
(b) means that Adaptec will lose some sales. It isn't like losing the
Windows market, but then Adaptec would lick spittle off Bill's boots to
avoid that. It DOES mean, when looked at from a stockholder
perspective, that earnings were not all they could be. That view would
be totally accurate.... unless somebody had a secret deal to make it
impossible to give out the info needed to do an opensource driver and
the concomittant utility code and Adaptec received a substantial reward
for that undertaking.
As my legal advisor says, such a deal would be a crime,and,very likely,
its existance would eventually leak.
Neither he nor I believe in conspiracy theories that last very long,
particularly in corporations where more than one party per side is
involved. So patience, my friends.....
I don't really care whether the SEC gets 'em or the stockholders do but
I'm sure of one thing: One or both should be interested. Their
(Adaptec) fiduciary duty is to maximise return for the stockholder and
there is no fury like a stockholder spurned. Male or female.
I'm totally unaware of what deals may have been done and so I cannot
allege that there are any in place. All the above (except for logical
deductions) is pure speculation but if the theories on which it is
based are faulty then I'd love to be put in my place by a concrete
statement as to where I missed the point.
Such a statement by some toady with no corporate responsibility would
be treated with the contempt it deserves.
>From the land "down under": Australia.
Do we look <umop apisdn> from up over?
Do NOT CC me - I am subscribed to the list.
Replies to the sender address will fail except from the list-server.
|