🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <badger.826507109@phylo.life.uiuc.edu>,
badger@phylo.life.uiuc.edu (Jonathan Badger) wrote:

>paul@serena.iaehv.nl (Paul Kolenbrander) writes:
>
>>< by definition,
>>> shareware authors are amateur programers who program for fun, and not
>>> to put food on their table.
>
>>Where did you get that definition? As it is incorrect in a lot of
>>cases. Eg. mine and the AWeb author to name but two.
>
>There seems to be some confusion as to what I mean by "amateur". A
>person can be a professional programmer by day, but is still an
>amateur in their spare time. Indeed that is what "spare time" means --
>time you are not being paid for.

Your logic here it completely circular. You state that we shouldn't ask
for money for our programs because we're amateur programmers, but then say
we're amateur programmers because we don't receive money for our efforts.

Let me say that I am a professional programmer. Both the software titles
that I license to other companies for commercial release, and those that I
release myself as shareware garner me money.

I program for fun, and it's lucky that it does put food on my table,
otherwise I wouldn't be able to afford having fun programming anymore.

Kevin Fox
Fury Solutions
www.fury.com