"Jenn" <> wrote in
news:ifmemm$85c$:
>> When you view something besides wikipedia; say a real
>> dictionary.com site; you get this:
>
> Do you know the standards wikipedia has to go through for any text
> to be allowed to be published? There has to be verifiable proof
New standards now finally?

In what possible way does that make
wikipedia more reliable than dictionary.com?
> I was a sysop based on definition #2 & #3 that I provided, and I
> worked with a couple hundred others over the period of time I was
> one.
That you provided.. LOL, funny!
>> No, they aren't. MS ****ed the term up just as they have with other
>> terms and copyrights from other companies. It's the MS way. You
>> played right into it.
>
> I can't help you don't like MS.... take it up with them.
You didn't learn much from the kids teasing you in school if the best
you could accomplish was weak imitations.
--
Hackers are generally only very weakly motivated by conventional
rewards such as social approval or money. They tend to be attracted by
challenges and excited by interesting toys, and to judge the interest
of work or other activities in terms of the challenges offered and the
toys they get to play with.