Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 8th Nov 2006 20:03 UTC
Novell and Ximian "Novell is not SCO. Novell is not the great anti-GPL. Get over it. I'm getting a little tired of the constant Novell-bashing. Do I think that Novell made a smart long term move by partnering up with Microsoft? No, I don't. For the record, the only software company that I can think of that has ever partnered with Microsoft and done well is Citix Systems. And, they did it by acting as if they were a branch of Microsoft. That is not, I repeat not, the case with Novell. What Novell is doing is a smart, short-term move. Novell makes a great Linux, but it's not been making great gains to go with it."
Order by: Score:
We shall see
by jdodson on Wed 8th Nov 2006 20:19 UTC
jdodson
Member since:
2006-03-29

I guess we will see if this is a smart short term move or not. I don't think its smart from any angle, but time will tell not opinions.

Reply Score: 5

RE: We shall see
by theuserbl on Thu 9th Nov 2006 13:21 UTC in reply to "We shall see"
theuserbl Member since:
2006-01-10

You are right. Let us see, what the future brings.

Also interesting it would for the lawyer of RedHat who says, that Novell is in one year dead and RedHat exists as the one and only commercial Linux distributer.

The nice thing is, that the lawyer have choosen a time, which is not long away from today.

If he isn't right and Novell will be in one year still existing, will be still a famous OpenSource-company and so on, then RedHat can discharging his lawyer. If the lawyer is itself so surely, that Novell will in one year no longer exists and it still exists, than there is no relying on onther forecasts of him.

But if he is right, then the value of this lawyer goes up and become a rise in salary. Which is then also not a big problem for RedHat, because they then have additional customers, which where before customers of Novell.

Edited 2006-11-09 13:23

Reply Score: 1

One reason they are not SCO...
by IanSVT on Wed 8th Nov 2006 20:21 UTC
IanSVT
Member since:
2005-07-06

The main difference in my eyes, is that even excluding Linux completely from Novell's product line, they have far and away much more interesting, useful, and relevent technology. SCO is a dead whale. Novell still has edirectory, groupwise, zenworks, and identity manager. Those aren't products to scoff at. SCO doesn't have anything that is relevent these days besides a very cumbersome server OS.

Reply Score: 5

RE: One reason they are not SCO...
by twenex on Wed 8th Nov 2006 22:30 UTC in reply to "One reason they are not SCO..."
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

In other words, you mean Novell will play by the GPL rules because it has something to offer, whereas SCO was so desperate that they were willing to risk losing all credibility as well as the case and profits?

Could be, could be.

Reply Score: 1

IanSVT Member since:
2005-07-06

Twenex, basically yes. SCO had and still do not have anything over competitors. They do not have a viable product line. They under estimated IBM, Novell, RedHat, and the open source community as a whole and thought they could throttle the adoption of linux through them by collecting licensing. In theory, it would have been a gold mine. In reality, they had and continue to have nothing. SCO is a cobbled together company with almost zero product history of their own. Novell, however, is an established company with a long product history of their own.

Reply Score: 1

right
by deanlinkous on Wed 8th Nov 2006 20:29 UTC
deanlinkous
Member since:
2006-06-19

"Novell is not SCO"

Thats right, MS has a lot more patents/IP, money, influence and a linux vendor in their (deep)pockets.

Oh and don't forget the lawyers too!

Reply Score: 2

Another perspective...
by zambizzi on Wed 8th Nov 2006 20:36 UTC
zambizzi
Member since:
2006-04-23

I've read bits and bytes about this here and there the past few days and from what I can gather is; This deal is a cooperative truce between the two companies for patents, is that correct?

Is that an "admission" of patent violation on Novell's part? If so, do they believe that partnering w/ MS that they can gain a competitive advantage over other Linux vendors by being the only ones who won't be sued by MS? Is it the mere threat, not necessarily the action, that they believe will give them an upper-hand in the marketplace?

I think we'll all struggle to get to the fine details and get a clear understanding of what this is...for at least a little while. The obvious knee-jerk reaction by those that oppose MS technologies is; run from SuSE ASAP and don't look back. While that may be an emotional response, lacking in sufficient rational reasoning...it may not be entirely unjustified.

I doubt that Novell is trying to do any harm to Linux, at least intentionally, it is probably more of a case of using MS as a bully for its competition and a boon for its customers...at least from what I can understand from the last few days of news & commentary.

I think Microsoft sees this as a new angle for competing w/ the growing threat to its market-share that is Linux and other open technologies. I doubt that anyone who keeps up w/ tech news can be surprised that they're leveraging their broad collection of patents...pulling out the big guns when necessary.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Another perspective...
by twenex on Wed 8th Nov 2006 20:51 UTC in reply to "Another perspective..."
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

Indeed. And I think only time will tell - no matter how many people use the "MS has changed. Yes it has. Yes it has!" "argument", I'll only be convinced by MS's actions, (or rather, as to the prospect of forking, inactions). However, two things are worrying:

MS "promises not to sue" *users of Novell's Linux*. Now, is suing users of a product that violates your patent (rather than suing the producer of that product) even legal? And why promise not to sue only Novell's customers, since the GPL clearly prohibits the distribution of any code that's found to be violating a patent by anybody?

Given that MS is always banging on about how cool its technology is, couldn't they have found a technology value-add/differentiator instead? To use a favourite word of theirs, how about some innovation? Or are FUD, threats, intimidation, and lock-in really all they can come up with?

Reply Score: 3

RE: Another perspective...
by grat on Wed 8th Nov 2006 21:53 UTC in reply to "Another perspective..."
grat Member since:
2006-02-02

I've read bits and bytes about this here and there the past few days and from what I can gather is; This deal is a cooperative truce between the two companies for patents, is that correct?

No, this is a co-operative venture to develop better interoperability with regards to virtualization and directory services. In addition, Microsoft agrees to promote SuSE Linux, and Novell and Microsoft agree to a 5 year cease-fire on each others customers.

Is that an "admission" of patent violation on Novell's part?

No. Most emphatically not. In fact, even if it were, Novell would NOT be protected under this agreement. Novell's customers, yes, Novell, no.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Another perspective...
by santana on Wed 8th Nov 2006 22:38 UTC in reply to "RE: Another perspective..."
santana Member since:
2006-10-22

"No, this is a co-operative venture to develop better interoperability with regards to virtualization and directory services. In addition, Microsoft agrees to promote SuSE Linux, and Novell and Microsoft agree to a 5 year cease-fire on each others customers."

No, it is not. It could be, but the deal then shouldn't have MS giving Novell 300 mil $. If you want to build better interop, the your tech guys sit down, talk and cooperate, and voila, the better interop is there.

So, "in addition" part is actually a better interop (just like that deal MS and Sun had, with mythical "better interop" never materialized).

This is classical crosspatenting agreement, with huge MS in advance payout (for God knows what) and some creative wrangling around GPL. And some strange "promisses not to sue" each other customers. For 5 years. Which is even stranger. And which means absolutely nothing for Novells customers, because IMB, Oracle, RedHat, Sun, BEA or God knows who else could sue them for their patents, if this software patent nonsense continues.

Reply Score: 3

Reasoning for covenant
by Jody on Wed 8th Nov 2006 20:49 UTC
Jody
Member since:
2005-06-30

This is speculation, but here it goes.

Because the GPL pretty much states that if Novell customers don't have the rights to redistribute/fork the code, then Novell is not able to provide it to them in the first place. So why the agreement not to sue Novell customers you might ask?

Well, the best reason I can think of is that this deal is about using SuSE as a virtualization platform. For example: A user of SuSE Linux, and MS Windows decides they need to reverse engineer some hack to make software X work on their platform (something like Wine).

Companies could be afraid that doing this leads them open to lawsuit from MS for not obtaining licenses for the technology, some of these customers may even have access to Windows source code.

In this instance Novell is not distributing proprietary software but the user still needs legal protection. Also, the GPL does not apply here unless the end user (a large company in this case) is redistributing the software with their changes.

Also, I think RH lost the ability to claim Novell is creating an unfair scenario by offering this protection for users when recently it offered its users similar legal protection for IP lawsuits.

But RH does not get what this is about. This is about companies teething through Linux/Windows deployments via virtualization not having to look over their shoulder when implementing some of the hacks oft-required to make things go well. This is not about Novell distributing software that infringes anyone’s IP.

But as I said at the beginning, I am just speculating.

Edited 2006-11-08 21:07

Reply Score: 5

A Tale of Two Trends
by twenex on Wed 8th Nov 2006 21:06 UTC
twenex
Member since:
2006-04-21

This is a little off-topic but I think still relevant (does that make any sense?!)

1. There was an article on LinuxPlanet about Oracle joining the Free Standards Group, in which an employee of the FSG noted that "people are getting sick and tired" of lock-in. I would agree with that. Personally I was sick and tired of it the day I had to exchange my Amiga for a PC in day-to-day use.

2. Linux Today recently linked to an article on Silicon.com that said "The Linux Desktop is dead". One comment to the story on Linux Today noted that the report is from the UK, and that the UK is much more heavily tied into MS than almost any other country (the British govt was, and perhaps still is, the biggest single user of MS products outside the US). As a Brit I would certainly agree with that from what I've been hearing about the rest of the world - in fact it may be the case that the UK as a country is far more heavily tied into MS than anything but the tied-to-MS sections of the US.

The upshot of all this is, I think even if the Novell deal results in a fork of Linux, it'll be of most interest to those who have the MS-is-everything mindset, and if it's forked, everyone else will stay well away.

Reply Score: 1

Suse is nice
by kap1 on Wed 8th Nov 2006 21:06 UTC
kap1
Member since:
2006-05-12

love the SUSE distro, its my personal favorite, but it wasn't a smart move on Novells part to team up with Linux's arch enemy Microsoft ;) .

Reply Score: 1

RE: Suse is nice
by Jody on Wed 8th Nov 2006 21:26 UTC in reply to "Suse is nice"
Jody Member since:
2005-06-30

"but it wasn't a smart move on Novells part to team up with Linux's arch enemy Microsof."

Do me a favor and double check the URL in your address bar because I am pretty sure you misspelled Slashdot.

Reply Score: 3

Of course
by santana on Wed 8th Nov 2006 21:54 UTC
santana
Member since:
2006-10-22

it was a smart short-term move for Novell. They just got 300 mil $ for nothing. Actually, a brilliant short term move. That "money for nothing" part is what pissed of plenty of people, including lots of guys who wrote lots of software Novell is now "proxy" for. See, 300 mil $ for nothing except giving a chance to MS to go with undefined IP property crap threats deserves a lots of bashing. I'm in financial problems to, my wife wants to fire me as CFO AND as CEO (and lots of other things), but I don't go out asking some bully to scare the shit out of my neighbours telling them that the only way they can freely breath is though giving a bully the money with me being proxy. With the good bully paying me some of that money upfront.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Of course
by elsewhere on Wed 8th Nov 2006 22:38 UTC in reply to "Of course"
elsewhere Member since:
2005-07-13

it was a smart short-term move for Novell. They just got 300 mil $ for nothing. Actually, a brilliant short term move. That "money for nothing" part is what pissed of plenty of people, including lots of guys who wrote lots of software Novell is now "proxy" for. See, 300 mil $ for nothing except giving a chance to MS to go with undefined IP property crap threats deserves a lots of bashing.

The patent provisions from Novell have nothing to do with linux. Novell has a patent portfolio that predates their linux business, but the ones that give Microsoft the biggest willies are the ones acquired from Commerce One that cover b2b and web services and may directly impact Windows and frankly, from what I heard about the patents when Novell originally acquired them, MS is probably getting off the hook lightly there considering how screwed they were by the Eolas patents on browser plugins. Novell owns the patents, they're ultimately free to do whatever they want, the community has little say or right to get angry, other than to wag their finger a little bit with a tsk-tsk for validating the notoriety of software patents.

It's the patent protection from Microsoft that has everyone scratching their heads (except for me, of course, who is still convinced this is purely about licensing for mono).

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Of course
by santana on Wed 8th Nov 2006 23:04 UTC in reply to "RE: Of course"
santana Member since:
2006-10-22

"The patent provisions from Novell have nothing to do with linux. Novell has a patent portfolio that predates their linux business, but the ones that give Microsoft the biggest willies are the ones acquired from Commerce One that cover b2b and web services and may directly impact Windows and frankly, from what I heard about the patents when Novell originally acquired them, MS is probably getting off the hook lightly there considering how screwed they were by the Eolas patents on browser plugins. Novell owns the patents, they're ultimately free to do whatever they want, the community has little say or right to get angry, other than to wag their finger a little bit with a tsk-tsk for validating the notoriety of software patents.

It's the patent protection from Microsoft that has everyone scratching their heads (except for me, of course, who is still convinced this is purely about licensing for mono)."

Fair enough, and it would be great if they actually said that this is what they've done (Novell has every right to sell what they own). But they didn't.
If I'm reading what they said right, they won't sue eachothers CUSTOMERS, And then there is that big MS in advance payment for SLES vauchers. And a obligation from MS on marketing Suse as "right" Linux. And dedicated sales staff. And lots of talk about IP, proxy, "legal" Linux.

Look, Novell is not Eolas, Eolas was one man, Novell is a company. If Novell ever tried to attack MS with patents, MS would crush them back with their own portfolio. Look what happened to SCO after trying that stuff with IBM. Thats why companies enter crosspatenting deals. And declare them as such. Novell got money for something else here, and it is pretty obvious for what, so don't defend them. They COULD say, look, we settled for our b2b/web services/SysV/whatever patents, and got 300 mil. They didn't. Why?

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: Of course
by Shkaba on Wed 8th Nov 2006 23:39 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Of course"
Shkaba Member since:
2006-06-22

I must say that to me mono was a bit on the borderline from the get go, not that I'm an expert in law (which I am not), but what really gets me going is this MS bs about patents and indemnation, and what not. If thay had a case they would have exploited it long time ago. The only candidates are mono, and novell's edition of OO (vba macros ... I don't know what is the situation in that field). In short this does not give me a good vibe PERIOD

By the way, I'll be rushing to the pattent office to register my great invention 1+1=10 and then watch out I'm gonna sue the entire software industry. This busines of software patents/IP is plain stupid.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Of course
by elsewhere on Thu 9th Nov 2006 02:01 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Of course"
elsewhere Member since:
2005-07-13

By the way, I'll be rushing to the pattent office to register my great invention 1+1=10 and then watch out I'm gonna sue the entire software industry.

Sorry, somebody beat you to it.

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/29130

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Of course
by Cutterman on Thu 9th Nov 2006 20:38 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Of course"
Cutterman Member since:
2006-04-10

"Novell got money for something else here, and it is pretty obvious for what, so don't defend them. They COULD say, look, we settled for our b2b/web services/SysV/whatever patents, and got 300 mil. They didn't. Why?"

I think something turned up in SCO/Novell/IBM discovery that was potentially lethal for MS - a real showstopper. Patents and/or incriminating documents and/or copyrights.

No-one wants a war, it wouldn't profit anyone. Hovsepian is an old IBMer (17 years service) and he's nobody's fool.

This "agreement" may be a facesaver for MS - with a whole variety of separate IP concessions and NDAs behind the curtain.

Novell/IBM may just have won the biggest victory Linux has ever had, but business is business and they recognised that MS had to be allowed to retain it's dignity.

The reaction from the community was eminently predictable and Novell are not so stupid that they didn't anticipate it. Perhaps they felt that having to absorb this was a fair swap for blowing MS' secrets.

Look forward to Samba and NTFS specs becoming quietly available over the next year.

I think there's a lot more here than meets the eye - the software ecology may just have undergone a major shift.

Time will tell.

Reply Score: 2

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols
by bibe on Wed 8th Nov 2006 22:02 UTC
bibe
Member since:
2005-07-09

That guy Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols lacks some imagination, just reading his articles about IceWiesel and stuff, he really doesnt have a clue, dont know why they put his articles on OsNews, seriously.

Reply Score: 1

v RE: Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols
by NotParker on Wed 8th Nov 2006 22:24 UTC in reply to "Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols"
RE[2]: Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols
by twenex on Wed 8th Nov 2006 23:10 UTC in reply to "RE: Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

But if you look at who posted the link and his comments about SJVN...

Oh. NotParker. Nevermind.

Reply Score: 3

ronaldst Member since:
2005-06-29

Fundies are usually narrow-minded. Like in the case of the OSS fundies. ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols
by twenex on Thu 9th Nov 2006 01:45 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

Or indeed the closed-source fundies.

Reply Score: 1

DigitalAxis Member since:
2005-08-28

Off-topic:

If notParker is never going to change his mind no matter what you say, what's the point of continuing to say anything (across 15 news threads)? I don't think you need to warn all of us about him any more. I can read and judge his posts on my own.

On-topic:

Now that I've heard the initial reports and theorizing about Novell and Microsoft, I'm going to see what starts happening. Will Microsoft start a campaign of threatening or insinuating threats to sue Red Hat and Mandriva? Will the GPL really prevent Novell from selling Linux products? Or will Microsoft start writing Linux software?

We're going to need time to find out what's going on (when does the new 'Novell is my friend' ad campaign start?), and until then I'm going back to business as usual.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols
by bibe on Thu 9th Nov 2006 14:04 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols"
bibe Member since:
2005-07-09

Nah it's not because this guy doesn't hate Novell that is don't like him, it's because he is a so called advocate for the (F)OSS and an alternative to MS but i don't loose the feeeling that he is a "windows trained" type of user. One mainstream application for everything, no forks and alternatives, which is the beauty of OSS, the very heart of it. It's not a corporate hirarchy, if ppl wan't to take the program in a different direction, then why not be happy about it, I mean it's their effort u get for free and they mostly do it for free, thats why we have something different in the first place. Just read this guys Icewiesel and beryl articles saying like, it's "best for the users" NOT TO have alternatives when they use "alternative" software...
I think he wants just another free Windows.

Reply Score: 1

But Microsoft *is* SCO
by walterbyrd on Wed 8th Nov 2006 22:58 UTC
walterbyrd
Member since:
2005-12-31

Or, maybe it would be more accurate to say that scox is owned by msft.

Before the scox-scam, scox's market cap was under $6 million. After msft and sunw arranged financing, scox is now worth about $135 million.

Scox is just an extension of msft.

Reply Score: 0

Novell is SCO
by tsume on Wed 8th Nov 2006 23:38 UTC
tsume
Member since:
2006-07-24

Linux-Watch IS a child site of ZIFF DAVIS

Okay. From the article we seen yesterday from the ziff davis site. We can now conclude this article is *yet* another marketing piece to lower the effects of the novell/ms agreement.


http://osnews.com/permalink.php?news_id=16400&comment_id=179293

The article is yet another MS/or novell funded piece.

The people at any magazine, let alone ZD write articles for people who pay. Please remember when you're reading a site like ZD, you're reading company funded material.

I'm really sick and tired of these people doing this.

Edited 2006-11-08 23:50

Reply Score: 5

RE: Novell is SCO
by IanSVT on Thu 9th Nov 2006 00:41 UTC in reply to "Novell is SCO"
IanSVT Member since:
2005-07-06

The article is yet another MS/or novell funded piece.

That's a pretty baseless comment. Could the guy have a pro microsoft and or novell bias? Sure he could. Does his paycheck coming from ZD mean that he is and that automatically mean his opinion is crap?

In that case, if opinions were crap, then the oceans of the earth would be boiling from all the heat produced. Hell, the opinions displayed on this site could power a steam powered train across europe.

Seriously though, you can disagree with dude's points. But to discount them because he gets a check from ZD is absurd.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Novell is SCO
by Almindor on Thu 9th Nov 2006 09:56 UTC in reply to "RE: Novell is SCO"
Almindor Member since:
2006-01-16

I thought that pink glasses were not "in" anymore, perhaps I was wrong.

Reply Score: 1

Open Audio
by IanSVT on Thu 9th Nov 2006 00:46 UTC
IanSVT
Member since:
2005-07-06

Instead of making another topic on this, I just downloaded the latest open audio pod cast which explains more of the deal.

http://www.novell.com/company/podcasts/openaudio.html

Reply Score: 1

Thanks for your opinion
by fsckit on Thu 9th Nov 2006 00:59 UTC
fsckit
Member since:
2006-09-24

Novell is not the great anti-GPL. Get over it. I'm getting a little tired of the constant Novell-bashing.

Well that's too bad. You can scream it all you want to that Novell is not evil, but that won't make it true.

Reply Score: 1

Truth hurts
by Sphinx on Thu 9th Nov 2006 01:22 UTC
Sphinx
Member since:
2005-07-09

Novell is not the great anti-GPL. Get over it. I'm getting a little tired of the constant Novell-bashing.

They've sold us out, we'll just have to deal with it, move on and learn to love BSD.

Reply Score: 2

Question
by pzad on Thu 9th Nov 2006 07:15 UTC
pzad
Member since:
2005-12-23

What if GPL v3 will take care about such cases. Many GPLed software has "GPL v2 any later version" clausule. Redhat and othars own copyrights on man base components of linux (not kernel, but userspace applications). If Redhat will start use GPL v3 on their contributions, Novell will be forced to do fork of these components (under GPL v2 only) and I don't think, Novell has enough power to maintans this forks.

Reply Score: 2

whoever paid the writers pay cheque......
by REMF on Thu 9th Nov 2006 08:10 UTC
REMF
Member since:
2006-02-05

i agree with the sentiment, and i'm sick to the back teeth of blow-hard, novell hating.

i'll wait to see how the SUSE dev community reacts rather than you lot.

Reply Score: 4

Whatever
by segedunum on Thu 9th Nov 2006 10:39 UTC
segedunum
Member since:
2005-07-06

For the record, the only software company that I can think of that has ever partnered with Microsoft and done well is Citix Systems. And, they did it by acting as if they were a branch of Microsoft......That is not, I repeat not, the case with Novell.

So the only company to have done well out of Microsoft is Citrix, and they're effectively a subsidiary of Microsoft, and you somehow believe that this won't happen to Novell? For what reason?

Begin to get the picture now? Novell is cash-rich, but it needed a big deal, and it needed it badly.

Alternatively, they could create software that is good, not full of bugs and delayed like Groupwise 7, make SLES the Netware replacement it is supposed to be and give it top notch command line and graphical tools, and start selling.

That doesn't make this a good deal, nor does it mean Novell is not another SCO when it tries to get around the GPL by saying the agreement is between Novell's customers and Microsoft themselves.

Novell has proven itself to be a loyal friend of Linux. And, it's not only Linux.

Not really. It's even more difficult to trust them now.

Reply Score: 3

v Who to believe?
by cocoaman on Thu 9th Nov 2006 12:58 UTC
Grim vibes
by moleskine on Thu 9th Nov 2006 13:13 UTC
moleskine
Member since:
2005-11-05

Novell is facing a bleak future. Its finances don't add up and they haven't added up for several years now. Nothing in this deal suggests that Novell will come anywhere near filling the gap between sharply declining Netware revenues and relatively minuscule Linux revenues. You could almost say the deal was an act of desperation.

What it has done, further afield, is put Microsoft in pole position to examine exactly what Novell's intellectual assets are and, perhaps, buy its patents at a later date if Novell hits the tubes. That is the real danger of this deal to me. It has nothing to do with SCO or litigation but with who may eventually get to own what.

I particularly liked the comment of an Ubuntu dev on Booster Perens: "The day that Bruce Perens gets to tell me that Novell is the new SCO is the day that I willingly accept an offer to be sodomised with a pneumatic drill."

Reply Score: 3

One phrase comes to mind.
by NixerX on Thu 9th Nov 2006 14:25 UTC
NixerX
Member since:
2006-01-04

Sleeping with the enemy....

While im at it:
The one universal truth is that Microsoft is a devious company. 90%+ of the desktop market isnt enough. Keep pushing new versions making more changes to the interface that fixing core issues...but we the consumers keep swallowing the Jagged little pill.

---bah..please fogive me for ranting.
-nX

Reply Score: 2

RE: One phrase comes to mind.
by twenex on Thu 9th Nov 2006 15:21 UTC in reply to "One phrase comes to mind."
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

Forgive you for ranting? That's what most of us use this site for!

Reply Score: 1

yea
by deanlinkous on Thu 9th Nov 2006 16:33 UTC
deanlinkous
Member since:
2006-06-19

Yep, flaming and ranting is the fun relaxing thing to do sometimes. As long as it does not get personal then it is still just a damn good discussion between the two extreme sides of the issue and everything in between.

Seems I may have been flaming and ranting too much since every article I submit now seems to get trashed.

Reply Score: 1