From: stine@vivaldi.psu.edu (Jeffrey Stine)
Subject: Re: Renegade Outpost DIKUMud
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 92 08:05:56 GMT

In article <1992Oct2.035829.25528@u.washington.edu> hamrick@milton.u.washington.edu (Mike Hamrick) writes:
>
[...]
>
>This thing started with Jackie F. Russell who writes:

It started a good deal before that even. 

>
>>Please i wont even read this damn newsgroup anymore, even tho i run a diku. 
>>I should have never posted what i thought was a helpful post. All it has 
>>done is fucked shit up. Too bad noone else thinks that stealing code is bad.
>>Glad you dont have my fucking code.
>
>After reading his messages, it appears to me that he is extremely pissed
>about the possibility that someone might have stolen some sloth code.  I
>think he also feels that not enough people share his anger and opinions
>regarding this alledged theft.
>
And rightfully so he was a bit indignant. For people (including Mr. Strake)
chatised him for saying that the code was stolen. People refused to believe
this, rather choosing instead that he was out ruin a friend (he stated
something along those lines) and the Renegade Outpost.

(Even now it is still an alledged theft? Well yes the perosn wasn't tried
and convicted, but..) Russell also later clarified this by telling us that his
information came from the implementor that stole it... go figure.
("If it walks like a duck...")
Of course it would be a cruel joke if all this talk of theft was made up.
But so far I haven't heard any denials from the alledged perpetrator.


>Next, strake@dartmouth.edu writes in response to this article:
>
>>Well I don't know about the rest of folks, but in every CS course I've ever
>>been in, the profs say you can use any code you like to help you with your
>>program just credit it to the proper people. Otherwise it would just take
>>far too long to code anything of value, and nearly impossible to improve on
>>something.
>
>>Aside from that, I haven't seen any posts which backed stealing code.
>>The only one that came close was mine from earlier, and that was actually
>>a post that didn't back people who publicly accused others of stealing code
>>without giving us (the public) any reliable basis for the claim.
>
>It seems to me that Strake was trying to clarify things.  I think he attempted
>to tell Jackie that nobody was actually saying that stealing code was OK, but
>merely enthusing on the merits of sharing code, like they do at Dartmouth.
>
Um we difinitely disagree here. In the tone of the thread up to that point
the concentration was on theft and whether the code at RO was indeed stolen.
It sounded to me in the context of the thread as though the reference to
sharing was yet another justification for the RO to have the code.
And in fact he made no mention of the word sharing.
Rather he says "use any code you like", which sounds to me as though he
either drafted the post wrong or subscribes to the belief that his CS dept.
is saying something like: go ahead take whatever you can find.
He does seem to take one step back from actually saying stealing is ok, but in
a rather bizarre way. To say that no one else is saying stealing is ok is
rather faint damnation.


>Now we're getting close to what I responded to:
>
>Jeffrey Stine writes:
>
>>Does Dartmouth have a large CS program? Please say no, I'd hate to think of
>>what these people could do to our legal system.
>>Those things "of value" are exactly what people try to protect and if
>>you wish to share yours with others that is fine but please don't expect
>>the rest of us to believe this.
>
>After reading this message, I was convinced that Stine was attacking the CS
>department at Dartmouth for sharing code.  This of course pissed me off, 
>because I believe strongly in code sharing.  If Stine actually thought that
>the Dartmouth CS department encouraged their students to STEAL code, then
>I apologize for jumping down his throat.
>
I disdainfully reflected the connection that Mr. Strake made between what
he says is "policy" for Dartmoth's CS courses and the fact that someone
has ripped off someone else's code.
I did not truely believe that they condoned actual theft, but rather the
message was garbled somewhere at that end. And I would gladly have _quietly_
read a correction or clarification on his part.
Even better a public denunciation from Mr. Strake of theft of any code
would clear this up, since up to this point he has done nothing but come
down on Mr. Russell for publicly proclaiming there is a thief at RO.

>
>Ah!  A misunderstanding!  I don't think Strake's message inferred that code
>STEALING was OK under any circumstances, credited or not.
>
>>You young sir can continue to read postings wrong and jump in with both
>>feet in your pinhead mouth, but I _will_ cling to the idea that theft of
>>software is wrong and all the courts in the world would probably back me
>>up.
>
>I think you are guility of this more than I.  I think you misread Strake's
>message regarding Dartmouth.  In my eyes, at no point in his message did
>he condone code stealing.  That would be silly now wouldn't it?
>
Well I once again disagree. My beef was with Mr. Strake's posting.
My reply may have sounded harsh at first reading, but it was not an attack
on Dartmouth. It was an attention getter pointing out the fact that it
_sounds_ as though he justified a theft (not condoned) by saying, well
we share our code here and if that other mud had shared what they had,
then Renegdae Outpost wouldn't have had to steal it.
In fact what the actual policy at Dartmouth is, is still not entirely
clear in my mind, but I gave him room to correct me by making it a question.

As to why you should be concerned about my remarks on Dartmouth, I am
also unclear on. You do go to washington? Any relation to Dartmouth?
Can you shed any light on Dartmouth policy? Are you a relative of Mr. Strake?

I am more guilty? That is to laugh. I didn't flame him.. well maybe a light
toasting. In the context of the thread his post looked screwy and I brought
this to light. I did not read his post wrong. Maybe I drew an erroneous
conclusion, but I did not ever say that he condoned theft. Whilst you
most definitely took me to task for not wanting to share.

[...]

Well at least you don't condone theft. 
But there is still one thing that bothers me. Aside from the theft issue.
There is also another underlying issue that seems to be the real unstated
focus of these later exchanges. Namely, if you are any kind of person at
all you _would_ share your code. Bogus.
If you have a lot of money or are interested in short lived fame along
with a few pats on the back for being such a swell guy. (Gee you're great)
Then your interest probably runs along the lines of share and share alike.
While I still insist that sharing is up to the individual and that it
doesn't make them any less a person if they choose to hold something
close to the breast. Such persons are protecting an investment.
And shame on you for implying that a person who does this is an "idiot".

- jeff (flames are for marshmallows) stine  ;)

Newsgroups: rec.games.mud,rec.games.mud.tiny,alt.mud,alt.mud.tiny