Look, whatever, your ARE the minority, that?s why auDA relaxed the rules and
continues to do so.

> There lies a fundamental difference, a lot of people would not, what ever
> the
> survival requirement.

> My comment was within the law as you defined it also.  You can not have
> your
> cake and eat it too.  What you want opens up the flood gates so you can't
> decide what gets applied to others without it applying to yourself also.

So, if it's within the laws of our country, how would you take my money,
legally?

> Obviously you don't know anything about me, what I do or what I'm involved
> in.
> Suits me, I don't mind surprising the odd people who attempt to argue with
> me
> without doing their research.  Especially when they resort to personal
> attacks.  Just goes to show they don't have any real arguments to put
> forward
> and have to rely on attempting to intimidate.

Oh, BooHooo want a tissue?


The attack came from you old boy.

Your exact comments

> Personally, I'd make a 
> point of never dealing with any company you are associated with and making

> sure people I know will not deal with you.

And you do know I can use this, it is defamation, because you don't know my
company and you have never used my services or products, so therefore you
have no insight into the quality of my offerings.

So all you have is character, again bad news for you.

So surprise me with your fabo research.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: dns-bounces+charlie=mccormack.net.au§dotau.org [mailto:dns-
> bounces+charlie=mccormack.net.au§dotau.org] On Behalf Of Darryl (Dassa)
> Lynch
> Sent: Sunday, 16 July 2006 12:25 AM
> To: '.au DNS Discussion List'
> Subject: Re: [DNS] Secondary Market
> 
> 
> |> -----Original Message-----
> |> From: dns-bounces+dassa=dhs.org§dotau.org
> |> [mailto:dns-bounces+dassa=dhs.org§dotau.org] On Behalf Of
> |> Charlie McCormack
> |> Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2006 11:21 PM
> |> To: '.au DNS Discussion List'
> |> Subject: Re: [DNS] Secondary Market
> |>
> |> > No, there are some people and I hope in the majority, who
> |> try to make
> |> > it a win/win situation where exploitation and unethical business
> |> > practices don't enter into the equation.
> |>
> |> When you say unethical, you mean unfair right, because I
> |> don't understand what is unethical about selling the gold
> |> nugget I dug up before you did.
> 
> Digging up a physical object is different to thinking of a word.  An
> object
> can be property but a concept is not the same.  If you don't understand
> the
> difference it will take more than a few postings on a list to get it
> across.
> 
> |> > I would take that to mean you would kill another person
> |> and feed them
> |> > up as well if a cow isn't available.  That sort of
> |> thinking is what
> |> > makes having rules and regulations necessary.
> |>
> |> Yes I would kill and eat another person if it meant
> |> survival, and it was the only thing, however, I'd first look
> |> to the ocean and exploit that first, it's tastier.
> 
> There lies a fundamental difference, a lot of people would not, what ever
> the
> survival requirement.
> 
> |> Thank god people like me fell out the trees centuries ago
> |> and exploited the planet to make it easier to live within,
> |> so I don't have to kill my own dinner.
> 
> Business is like hunting.  What you may hunt is dictated by your ethics.
> 
> |> > Some people need protecting from themselves.
> |>
> |> OK, now I can see why Jon said what he said, that is ****ing
> |> arrogant or immature you pick one, and you need to look for
> |> another game to play, because this one is only going to
> |> disappoint you, or better yet, take all your money.
> 
> I make good money out of what I do.  I don't owe anyone anything and own
> all I
> have.  I do alright.
> 
> |> > I haven't retired and never intend to.  But then I am not
> |> out to make
> |> > what I can and care about others.
> |>
> |> So you plan to exploit people in order to make yourself feel
> |> good, and for the rest of your life?
> 
> I don't exploit anyone, nor intend to.  I don't need to.
> 
> |> So what makes you different?
> 
> I do the right thing and keep it in mind at all times.  I don't just
> consider
> myself.
> 
> |> > Your view of what 'real world" rules there are is flawed.
> |> > If I took your lead I'd be justified in taking all your money and
> |> > doing whatever I wanted.  All the phishing and scams are
> |> legitimate
> |> > under your logic as it is just taking advantage.  If I can
> |> get your
> |> > banking details out of you by whatever means it allows me to clean
> |> > your account out.
> |>
> |> Now that is just immature and completely missing the point,
> |> if you actually had read my response without shooting your
> |> mouth off, you would have seen that law is something I'm
> |> emphasising on and that everything I have done is within the
> |> 'real world' laws.
> 
> My comment was within the law as you defined it also.  You can not have
> your
> cake and eat it too.  What you want opens up the flood gates so you can't
> decide what gets applied to others without it applying to yourself also.
> 
> |> Your logic is pathetic and immature.
> 
> I consider your's the same.  Others feel the same as me and we are in the
> majority at the present time.
> 
> |> > No, it isn't na?ve, I know people can't be relied on to do
> |> the right
> |> > thing.
> |> > There are far too many people who think like you do.
> |> Which is why we
> |> > have laws, rules and behaviour modifiers.
> |>
> |> Yes it is, and you have proved that in the above paragraph.
> 
> Your comment doesn't make any sense.  You are agreeing with me, glad to
> see
> you can appreciate the logic.
> 
> |> Thank god we don't have more people like you, otherwise we'd
> |> have too many sooks and not enough go getters, the country
> |> would be screwed, we would have to import go getters (more
> |> so than now).
> 
> Obviously you don't know anything about me, what I do or what I'm involved
> in.
> Suits me, I don't mind surprising the odd people who attempt to argue with
> me
> without doing their research.  Especially when they resort to personal
> attacks.  Just goes to show they don't have any real arguments to put
> forward
> and have to rely on attempting to intimidate.
> 
> |> Thank god people like you are still falling out of the trees.
> 
> I dare say you fell out of tree after me.  Be that as it may.  Out of
> trees or
> from under cabbages, all boils down to the same thing except how we were
> raised and what our beliefs are.
> 
> Darryl (Dassa) Lynch
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://dotau.org/