🚀 go-pugleaf

In <1992Sep14.170938.16654@mercury.cair.du.edu> jvilhube@diana.cair.du.edu (Jan Vilhuber) writes:

>Regarding Blanche's Article:
>It may be that the corporate people encourage that the public don't see the
>differences, but nonetheless, they are there. I *KNOW* that we don't see
>any of the profit from COMM.

I didn't imply that -- I said that both comm's profits and your company's
profits both funnel up to the same place, and are both reflected in
the stock price.  I agree you aren't likely to get money from comm just
for the heck of it.

>Great ... now I got two (out of three) of my teachers for the quarter 
>up in arms against me before the quarter even started. Wonder if I can
>get my psych teacher on too...

Who is he/she, I'll have a talk with him/her... :-)

But don't worry, if you put this much effort into your Op.Sys. homework,
you'll do fine... :-)

>Besides.. I never argued that the corporation is not corrupt. I just argued that
>the product is not bad and that not EVERYBODY in US WEST is a complete
>moron.

I don't think USW is necessarily "corrupt" -- my word would be "inept".
But I still believe this product is lousy.  Of course USW has good people;
the problem is those X% who are inept seem to be calling the shots.
-- 

Andrew Burt 		   					  aburt@du.edu

      "And that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana-shaped"