Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan Dognaux
My hands are cramping, but I hope I've made somewhat of a valid argument. In summary: I don't want Microsoft to come strolling into this thread and be offended by the very people they're supporting.
|
If Microsoft sees legitimate and coherent points made in this or other threads they will understand why some folks dislike some of their business practices or some of their nearly unavoidable products. They will be delighted to gain that understanding so that they can overcome the objections.
Thanks for helping everyone involved remember that having the authority to announce their opinions publicly in these discussions, comes with an implicit responsibility to also be able to explain them....
If Microsoft is surprised by anything they read on Chief Delphi, I'll be dumbfounded.
If Microsoft is making their investments because they think every FIRST participant already loves the company and its products, I'll be dumbfounded.
I'll bet that they see their investment as one that pays off in at least four ways.
1) It invests in name recognition and product exposure in a large slice of a what will be a valuable, scarce resource, not too long from now (i.e. the students)
2) It dovetails with their vision of the future and their desire/mandate to make money in that future.
3) It is the right thing for a good corporate citizen to do because of altruism and because a rising science, technology, and economic tide floats all boats.
4) It is a good thing to do that will be seen outside the FIRST community.
Success in none of these will depend crucially on what is written here, so long as the debates involve enough scholarship and coherent logic. If their continued sponsorship does hinge on Chief Delphi subscribers not complaining when complaints are merited, I'll be dumbfounded (and rather disappointed); and those folks with a low opinion of the corporation's practices will be somewhat vindicated.
The truth sets you free. Seek it through energetic debate in an open society that cherishes the transparency of its economic and political processes.
Blake