From: eric@remailer.net (Eric Hughes)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 94 20:59:35 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: BofA+Netscape
In-Reply-To: <199412130420.UAA25217@netcom4.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <199412130557.VAA01204@largo.remailer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


   From: jamesd@netcom.com (James A. Donald)

   Eric, read more, flame less, you might learn something.

Ah, I see.  Disagreement equals flaming.

   I posted a lengthy explanation of why it was counter productive 
   to take consensus with those who are lagging. 

And since they were _your_ ideas, they were correct.  You did not
reply to the substance of my own comments.  I now must hypothesize
that you didn't understand them.  I am at least polite enough to
refrain from implying that you didn't read them.

   A few years back, when the standards for new RAM chips
   were debated

The analogy between physical manufactures and compatible software is
inaccurate.  I implied that in my post, but I take it you didn't
follow my conclusion very far.

   In short, when the leading edge company dominates the
   standards committee, it is of little use, and when the 
   old companies dominate the standards committee, it is
   actually harmful.

The domain of applicability of this situation is not universal.

There is good reason to believe that it does not apply here.

Eric