🚀 go-pugleaf

pissed off wrote:

> "Criswell The Psychic Weatherman" <ssenate@mindless.com> wrote in message
> news:3E4BD4BD.8C511CE0@mindless.com...
> >
> > I see it now.  Just because I have an opinion that you don't like, even
> when I'm
> > agreeing with you, I must also be a shill.  In fact, everyone in the
> entire
> > world is an Intuit shill.  Paranoia is an interesting worldview, as
> everything
> > in the world continues to reinforce it.
> >
> > Who do I work for?  Read my posts.  I've made no secret of that.
>
> When my experiences with Intuit's software are misrepresented, and the act
> of complaining about corporate abuse is labeled as "immature," I am
> appropriately suspicious of those who are doing this.

I wasn't the one who said that.


> > The C-Dilla issue has been posted to the taxes newsgroups by just about
> > everyone.  PC magazine wrote about it.  The Wall Street Journal wrote
> about it.
> > The word is already out on C-Dilla, but perhaps not yet in
> alt.biz.accounting,
> > as that is not a newsgroup I normally read.
> >
> > If you feel you must add your voice to the thousands that are already
> screaming,
> > go right ahead, but one screaming voice in a crowd of thousands isn't
> likely to
> > make the screaming thousands any louder.  Intuit is already getting the
> > message.
>
> Oh, so now there are *too many* people "screaming." And if I were one of
> five or 10 people, then we would be isolated malcontents. See, this is how
> corporate shills work.

If there were only 5 or 10, then there would be a need to get the word out.  You
make a lot of wrong assumptions about me, and what I believe.  You must think
that there are only 5 or 10 people who read the Wall Street Journal and PC
Magazine.

> They will use any possible tactic to discredit anyone
> who has the effrontery to object to unethical, arrogant corporate behavior.

If you read my post, I already stated that I agree with you on the betrayal and
mistrust.  Since I agree with you, but you still think I don't agree with you,
I'm a shill.  Nothing I say will convince you otherwise, since you have ceased
to listen to reason.

> If Intuit is "already getting the message," then why don't they back the
> hell off of this stupid, arrogant, unethical betrayal of the trust that
> their longtime, loyal customers have placed in them? Seems to me that Intuit
> is treating this as a tempest in a teapot that will blow over soon.

Not so.  Their website now includes a C-Dilla removal tool.  Unfortunately, that
also makes the software not work, which defeats the whole purpose.

> They are so typical of corporate America, and especially of high-tech
> corporate America. The software companies seem to think their shit doesn't
> stink, and as a result they can treat their customers as adversaries. Too
> much has been said about Intuit? No way. Not enough has been said about
> Intuit.

That's your opinion.  I see it differently.

> > Can you imagine how many they must process every day as more and more
> > people decide that they don't want C-Dilla?  Your single individual refund
> will
> > have little impact, as will your single individual complaint here.  What
> will
> > have impact is the multiplied factor of all of those complaints directed
> towards
> > Intuit and the multiplied factor of having to process all of those refunds
> > individually.
>
> Are you trying to make me feel sympathy for these jerks? I'm doing what I
> can. I'm going to be returning their spyware-infected crap for the refund. I
> have complained directly to the company.

> I'm complaining on the Internet.
> For the moment anyway, we have free speech, although to judge by the way
> that high-tech companies like Yahoo, Cisco and Microsoft have climbed into
> bed with countries like China to sell them the electronic means to repress
> their populations, one wonders what is in store for Americans once they
> think they can get away with it here.

Wild unsubstantiated overgeneralizations don't help your case.

> It looks like we're about to go to war with Iraq, and quite possibly be
> attacked here in this country, all in the name of "freedom." Well, god damn
> it, what the hell is any of this about if we are to define a complaint as
> "immaturity" and hand over to corporations the right to spy on us as we do
> our taxes? Christ almighty, if you want to cut off your balls and hand them
> to Intuit, go ahead. But I won't.

Relevance?  More misplaced anger.

> > In a world where
> > everyone abided by license agreements, we wouldn't need C-Dilla.  However,
> there
> > is nothing preventing me from making copies and selling them myself,
> > undercutting Intuit, and pocketing the cash.  In fact, someone in this
> thread,
> > or a similar one has admitted to doing this for several years.  [This is
> in the
> > taxes newsgroups, and you may not have seen it]
>
> >You feel it's betrayal, and I
> > would agree, but you fail to realize that Intuit would like to protect
> some of
> > the investment that they put into making TurboTax.  Do you feel they don't
> have
> > that right?  Should Intuit provide tax software just so everyone could
> copy it,
> > and they would lose money from lack of sales?  Is it Intuit's fault that
> CD
> > burners are rather common and cheap and so are blank CD's?  If you were
> making
> > the decisions at Intuit, how would you protect your licensed property?
> What
> > would you, as the decision maker at Intuit, do?
>
> As the decision maker at Intuit, I would find a means of protecting my
> software without defining my customers as criminals in the process. There is
> no excuse whatsoever for what they are doing. They are proclaiming longtime,
> loyal customers as guilty until they prove themselves innocent. I object,
> and I will keep on objecting! It is arrogant, unethical; and deeply
> unAmerican. The people who run Intuit ought to move to China or something.

More excessive misplaced anger.

> > Again, you have trouble with reading comprehension.  I did not say to
> abandon
> > your protest.  I said it would be more effective if it was more directly
> pointed
> > towards Intuit.
>
> I have written directly to the company, and they are about to get their
> software back with a refund request.

As they should.

> > You're free to complain to anyone anywhere, but if you complain
> > where no action can be taken to resolve the complaint, you have just
> wasted a
> > lot of energy, achieved nothing, and probably increased your own
> frustrations.
> > If I had a problem with a particular store in a particular mall, would it
> make
> > sense to protest in a different mall that didn't have that store?  Or in
> that
> > other mall where the store in question did not have that problem?
>
> It is *never* a "waste" to protest abuses by corporations, governments or
> other people. This is part of the process of seeking justice, in ways large
> and small. And that's what we are about in America. Apparently you've been
> so addled by cable TV and Big Macs to realize it.

If you feel that way, so be it.  I prefer to make my voice heard where it will
be heard, than to make it heard where it will have no impact.

> > In my opinion, the word is out on C-Dilla.  The damage is done.  Intuit is
> > already feeling it, by having to process the refunds, and realizing that
> every
> > published article gets the word out.  I don't know how many people read
> this or
> > the other newsgroup.  I just feel that the amount of people you will reach
> by
> > this method will be small, and likely already know of the problem.  Thus,
> I feel
> > your protest is ineffective.  Is that so hard to understand?
>
> The word is not adequately out, because Intuit hasn't done anything about
> it. And now is the best time to make them feel the heat because it's tax
> season when people buy the software. What would you prefer, complaining in
> July? Maybe so!

Again, because you and I disagree about how much word has gotten out about
C-Dilla, I must be an Intuit shill.  Doesn't make sense.

> > Did you suggest "Flood Intuit's website with e-mails of protest for
> C-Dilla"?  I
> > didn't see you call for such an action.  That might be more effective.
> You feel
> > Intuit should re-engineer TurboTax this year without C-Dilla.  Intuit is
> more
> > concerned with getting tax updates out as some of the laws are very
> recent.
>
> What do you know about Intuit's concerns? Do you work for them?

I know of the recent changes in the tax laws.  I know that Intuit is behind in
updates, especially in regards to the new 8582 rental rules.  TaxCut already has
this update.  Intuit claims theirs won't be ready for another week.  Getting the
program accurate with the tax laws is the priority not just of Intuit but of all
tax software makers, not just TaxCut, and TaxAct, but ATX, TaxWise, ProSeries,
and other programs that cost several hundred to several thousand dollars each.

> > They have actually lagged behind the other software packages in their
> updates,
> > and I suspect dealing with C-Dilla is the reason.  They can't re-engineer
> it out
> > this year.  They spent too much time and effort incorporating it.
>
> Let me give you a little slogan they have in the U.S. Marine Corps that I
> think applies very well here: "CAN'T MEANS WON'T"

OK.  Tell me the new tax laws about form 8582 and rental real estate.  Tell me
about the most recent changes to sale of home rules.  Now, the de-engineering of
C-Dilla must take place rapidly for this tax season, or slowly between April and
next December.  Would you pay twice as much for TurboTax this year?  Because the
required rapid de-engineering to get the product on the shelf, and to remove all
of the current C-Dilla boxes would likely double the cost.  If you're willing to
wait for that, and pay double the cost, then everyone can tell who is the real
Intuit shill.  I have found that when someone accuses someone of being a shill,
it is often a smoke-and-mirrors cover-up to disguise their own shilling.

> > The two different versions of TurboTax [with and without C-Dilla] would
> not be
> > compatible, and would you want two different TurboTax's on your same
> computer?
> > They will almost certainly not use it next year, but the question remains,
> what
> > if anything will they use next year to protect their license agreement and
> > investment?  [Assuming that C-Dilla hasn't permanently poisoned the
> TurboTax
> > name]
> >
> > Instead of calling everyone a shill, ask yourself what you would do, as
> decision
> > maker at Intuit, to protect your license and investment and profits from
> being
> > destroyed by CD-burners.  I'd like to hear your answer.
>
> I am not a software engineer. I'm not qualified to tell you what copy
> protection scheme they should use. I don't object to copy protection in the
> least. But if they insist on spyware as a form of copy protection, they are
> out of line. The arrogance, disconnection, hostility and stupidity of the
> top management of Intuit utterly boggles my mind. It is surrealistic. Why or
> earth would a company that I have trusted with the most sensitive
> information I have insist that I install software capable of spying on me as
> a condition of its use?

Again, C-Dilla is not spyware.  You leep insisting that it is.  Spyware reports
information back to its host site without your knowledge and approval.  C-Dilla
only reports your verification code.  Yes, it runs in the background and usees
resources, but this is not the defintion of spyware.

Now you're starting to get more rational, but it doesn't answer my question.
You don't know.  We both agree that C-Dilla is not a good method.  Intuit
thought it was a good idea at the time, and has now been convinced otherwise.
[You disagree with my opinion on this and believe they still need more
convincing.]

> This is beyond bizarre.

It may have been bizarre before, but I believe you are the one making it beyond
bizarre.
--
"A belief is not merely an idea the mind possesses;
it is an idea that possesses the mind."  Robert Bolton
Criswell The Psychic Weatherman
ssenate@mindless.com