The return of Citizens Against Government Waste [LWN.net]

The return of Citizens Against Government Waste

Posted Sep 21, 2005 16:24 UTC (Wed) by rev (guest, #15082)
Parent article: The return of Citizens Against Government Waste

According to 'Citizens Against Government Waste' it
is bad when these 'one set of technoligies' are an Open Standard that
all vendors, including Microsoft, are free to implement and are thus able to provide the market with multiple, competing, compatible offerings. (Does this sound like free market, open competition, capitalism, or what?).

However, accroding to the 'Citizens Against Government Waste' it is NOT bad when these 'one set of technoligies' are Microsoft formats. (single vendor, does this smell like comunnism, or what?)

Here we have a reiteration of the usual FUD: non exclusive Microsoft solutions are bad.

This is definite proof that 'Citizens Against Government Waste' is just a propaganda machine.

(Log in to post comments)

The return of Citizens Against Government Waste

Posted Sep 22, 2005 4:06 UTC (Thu) by jtc (subscriber, #6246) [Link]

"...

Here we have a reiteration of the usual FUD: non exclusive Microsoft solutions are bad.

This is definite proof that 'Citizens Against Government Waste' is just a propaganda machine."

No - that's not it, and I'm surprised no one has noticed this. All the confusion people are experiencing trying to understand their complaint is due to a simple, small error. Obviously, these poor people have been so busy working to support their noble cause that they haven't noticed, or haven't had the time to correct, the error - just one word - a little preposition: When naming themselves, in their haste to get to the real work, they accidentally used the word "against" when they meant to use the word "for". Just make this substitution in their name and it will become clear that their complaint is justified.