24-Sep-2022 22:47 GMT.
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Anonymous, there are 37 items in your selection
[Web] Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits)ANN.lu
Posted on 19-May-2003 03:07 GMT by Raffaele37 comments
View flat
View list
Fleecy Moss "Answers Week nr. 10" is available on :AmigaWorld. Remarkable points are: «Bill McEwen is still CEO.» and «I have no comments to make about any on going lawsuits.» Hum, seems that Fleecy is "appealing to the fifth amendement".
(well, he has got his fully rights to do so)

Quoting:
-----------
4) Tigger: Where you unaware of what Bill McEwen was going to say in the Bolten Peck case about not being the CEO, or were you intentionally misleading the Amiga Community with your post that Bill McEwen was still the CEO??

Fleecy: Bill McEwen is still CEO. He was CEO before I posted that statement, he was the CEO when I posted that statement and is the CEO today as I type this answer to you. I have no comments to make about any on going lawsuits.

------
End Quoting

Take your own conclusions from these statements...

Bye,

Raffaele
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 1 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Mike Bouma on 19-May-2003 03:13 GMT
> I have no comments to make about any on going lawsuits

IMO a well done and professional decision. I wouldn't have expected another answer from an IBM, Sony or Sun executive regarding such legal matters. :)
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 2 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Nicolas Mendoza on 19-May-2003 03:26 GMT
In reply to Comment 1 (Mike Bouma):
Heh, unlike some other companies where their CEO would love to comment on the color of my boxers signing it with the names of the whole family tree.
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 3 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by tronman on 19-May-2003 04:06 GMT
Well there was last year's 20 minute diatribe about who was gonna get
sued etc, by a certain erstwhile CEO of a company who shall remain
Nameless..

That date seems to have come and gone..
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 4 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by T_Bone on 19-May-2003 04:47 GMT
Funny, Pecks lawsuit is OVER isn't it? Why is it referred to as "ongoing" as if he can't comment?
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 5 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 19-May-2003 05:37 GMT
I absolutely don't like your scarcastic news.
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 6 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Kjetil on 19-May-2003 05:42 GMT
CIO stuff is realy old,
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 7 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Darrin on 19-May-2003 05:51 GMT
In reply to Comment 4 (T_Bone):
Perhaps it's being appealed?
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 8 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by T_Bone on 19-May-2003 05:58 GMT
In reply to Comment 7 (Darrin):
Too late for that, he's already got a lein.
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 9 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by koan on 19-May-2003 06:11 GMT
In reply to Comment 8 (T_Bone):
> Too late for that, he's already got a lein.

What is a "lein" ?

koan
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 10 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by T_Bone on 19-May-2003 06:15 GMT
In reply to Comment 9 (koan):
Juxtapose i<->e

1 : a charge upon real or personal property for the satisfaction of some debt or duty ordinarily arising by operation of law
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 11 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Don Cox on 19-May-2003 07:02 GMT
In reply to Comment 4 (T_Bone):
"Funny, Pecks lawsuit is OVER isn't it? Why is it referred to as "ongoing" as if he can't comment?"

Maybe fleecy is not as interested in the court cases as some people. He very likely knows much less about them than Rich Woods.
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 12 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Neko on 19-May-2003 07:54 GMT
Of course Bill McEwen is CEO.

Of course that does not mean he was CEO at the time Garry Hare was passing
out cards. People come, people go, people get demoted and promoted again..

Such is the nature of business. All Fleecy is trying to do is make out like
it never happened. It's embarrasing to say that your CEO was releived of duty
and then took back his position when the other CEO decided the company was a
dead loss..

The above was *conjecture* :)

Lucky for Fleecy, if it's true, he isn't outright lying, he's just not telling
the whole story to us. Not that we need to know. Who cares anyway? :)
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 13 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Stefan Denis on 19-May-2003 08:05 GMT
These Q&As are just boring when they are hosted on a site by people who would defend Amiga Inc to the death.

Amiga Inc are a ruined company which are staying alive because of shitheads who continue to praise their failings.
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 14 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Olegil on 19-May-2003 08:24 GMT
In reply to Comment 2 (Nicolas Mendoza):
So what are the colors of your boxer? (Hey, you brought it up, not me! ;-) )
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 15 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 19-May-2003 09:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 13 (Stefan Denis):
No defenders without attackers. Tired of watching people defending them? Then stop attacking them. There is nothing wrong in defending something you believe in. IMO, it's quite admirable. Attacking something for the sole reason of existing on the other hand... What did they do to you that was so evil?
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 16 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 19-May-2003 09:15 GMT
In reply to Comment 5 (Anonymous):
And i don't like you.
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 17 of 37ANN.lu
In reply to Comment 13 (Stefan Denis):
Message removed by Christian Kemp for violation of ANN's posting rules.
Specific reason from moderator: Profanity
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 18 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Ian Shurmer on 19-May-2003 09:51 GMT
In reply to Comment 13 (Stefan Denis):
Oh shut up troll.
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 19 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Lando on 19-May-2003 10:28 GMT
In reply to Comment 15 (samface):
>What did they do to you that was so evil?

They lied and they stole. These are two qualities I find abhorent, I'm afraid.
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 20 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Raffaele on 19-May-2003 11:01 GMT
In reply to Comment 5 (Anonymous):
An Anonymous wrote in msg. 5:

A> I absolutely don't like your scarcastic news.

R>> Hum, seems that Fleecy is "appealing to the fifth amendement".

Here I was sarcastic...

R>> (well, he has got his fully rights to do so)

And here I didn't...

I think it is quite well polite to a person not to speak about any proceedings he/she could have..

(even if you are the suitor, the other contendant, or even a witness)

What you wrote on internet may be used as a proof...

(and forgive me if I made a misuse of legal terms. English is not my mother language and in this precise moment I am to lazy to get up and take a dictionary)

Ciao,

Raffaele
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 21 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 19-May-2003 11:02 GMT
In reply to Comment 19 (Lando):
Hey, if you want to be a pain, I can be a pain too.

1. For the millionth time; an estimate is *not* a "promise". They never said anything about any promises because they cannot promise anything about events yet to come (unless you are a true fortune teller, but I assume you don't believe in fairy tales). It was an estimate as in based on the information they had about the situation at that time. Big surprise; things change and don't always happen the way you planned them. I would hardly classify an estimate that didn't come true as an evil act against you. Get over it.

2. Steal? Care to elaborate on that one? Are you saying Bill McEwan stepped into your bedroom while you were asleep and stole your computer, or what?
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 22 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Emeric SH on 19-May-2003 11:15 GMT
In reply to Comment 21 (samface):
"For the millionth time; an estimate is *not* a "promise"."

Don't think that 2001 august was an estimation, as just _a week_ before the release date they reassured everyone that it will be released then, and whoever told the opposite was a liar, FUDder, whatever. That is pretty much an outright lie to me.
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 23 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by gz on 19-May-2003 11:29 GMT
In reply to Comment 3 (tronman):
>>That date seems to have come and gone..

Just as have any other dates the company in question has ever given in public ;)
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 24 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 19-May-2003 11:56 GMT
In reply to Comment 22 (Emeric SH):
A week? I seriously doubt that. But then, I don't have the time for looking it up right now.

Anyway, as you said yourself, that is what you *think*. You do NOT, because you possibly can not, *know* the circumstances involved. Around that time, there were still alot of ongoing negotiations with several possible third party developers, including the MorphOS team. What if (just play with the thought for a while) they truely believed that a certain third party would be able to deliver a nearly already finnished product within this short period of time? What if they were just inches away from closing such a deal?

For short, what if you would turn out to be wrong and that the blame for all this is actually to be turned in a completely different direction? Just "what if"...
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 25 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by MarkTime on 19-May-2003 15:22 GMT
In reply to Comment 1 (Mike Bouma):
>> I have no comments to make about any on going lawsuits

Mike "The Clown" Bouma responded:
>IMO a well done and professional decision. I wouldn't have expected another >answer from an IBM, Sony or Sun executive regarding such legal matters. :)

More professional comments from the professional journalist.
sigh...

Mike Fay, IBM Executive commenting on the SCO Unix lawsuit:

"We got a copy of the complaint this morning. Based on what we've seen of it, it's full of allegations with no supporting facts"

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2131627,00.html

Sun's special Counsel Michael Morris, comments on the Microsoft anti-trust case, and posted on Sun's corporate website:

Choice, innovation and competition form the foundation of the technology industry. Today's ruling does little to advance these principles or to protect the millions of developers and businesses that want an open marketplace.

http://www.sun.com/aboutsun/media/comment/2002-1102.html

Sony computer, commented to anyone asking them on their Connectix lawsuit...
this was there standard e-mail response (in part):

The Connectix "Virtual Game Station" does not accurately emulate the PlayStation gaming experience and consequently, is not fully compatible with all PlayStation game titles, a fact supported by Connectix's own admissions. It is important to note that this product attempts to imitate PlayStation gaming, but more than 17 million consumers can attest to the fact that nothing technically can compare to the experience delivered through the PlayStation game console in tandem with a home television set.


http://xlr8yourmac.com/archives/jan99/013099.html

----------------------------------

In short, Mike concludes that companies just don't comment on lawsuits,
when in fact, they comment on them all the time.

They don't comment on lawsuits that they will lose, that make them look
like unprofessional clowns...but they do comment on things, when they
have a reason.
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 26 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by MarkTime on 19-May-2003 15:24 GMT
In reply to Comment 25 (MarkTime):
oh yes, I should be careful with my comments,

I am sure what Mike Bouma meant, was that he would not
expect IBM, Sun, or Sony to comment on the Amiga, Inc. lawsuit.

:-)

I will agree with that.
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 27 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by 3seas on 19-May-2003 15:34 GMT
In summary:

Unique IP controllable content.
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 28 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Lando on 19-May-2003 15:35 GMT
In reply to Comment 21 (samface):
>2. Steal? Care to elaborate on that one? Are you saying Bill McEwan
>stepped into your bedroom while you were asleep and stole your computer,
>or what?

LOL I wish he would try... I have a baseball bat here with his name on it.

No, I mean that Amiga Inc knowingly offered for sale, and accepted payment for, products which they knew they would have great problems in delivering.

When it became clear that these products would not appear, customer's demands for refunds were ignored.
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 29 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 19-May-2003 15:54 GMT
In reply to Comment 24 (samface):
"A week? I seriously doubt that. But then, I don't have the time for looking it up right now. "

Then you seriously doubt incorrectly.

The facts are exactly as stated here - right up until the WEEK before it was due, Bill "on schedule and rockin'" McEwen was still lying and claiming it would be out then, and those who raised questions were dismissed completely.
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 30 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Anders on 19-May-2003 20:01 GMT
I like question 10. Strange that nobody that Fleecy asked remembers PREXX and that they think it was H&P's idea. He couldn't have asked Ben Hermans then as he mentioned it in an interview about a year ago.

http://www.gfxbase.com/FlashNews/show.pl/200204?START=60

---------
Thomas Richter will do a rewrite of Arexx - he calls it prexx
---------
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 31 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Tigger on 20-May-2003 02:35 GMT
>>>>
Fleecy: Bill McEwen is still CEO. He was CEO before I posted that statement, he was the CEO when I posted that statement and is the CEO today as I type this answer to you. I have no comments to make about any on going lawsuits."
------
End Quoting

Take your own conclusions from these statements...

>>>>>>

Either Fleecy is lying (which is what I beleive) or he is saying the Bill McEwen lied under oath as part of his testimony. I don't believe Bill is going to lie under oath, thus Fleecy is lying. Obviously the three amigos (Fleecy, Gary & Ray) havent got there story together yet on whats going on with the auction. A hint for them, tell the truth. The landlord locked you out and is now auctioning off your stuff. It might be a little embarassing, but its better then looking like buffoons as you constantly change the story, and each version has holes in it with regard to easily available data, its getting silly.
-Tig
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 32 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Ketzer on 20-May-2003 06:19 GMT
In reply to Comment 31 (Tigger):
theres still no proof that mceven _did_ say that.
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 33 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 20-May-2003 08:19 GMT
In reply to Comment 28 (Lando):
No, the AmigaOne nor the AmigaOS4 has ever been offered for sale by Amiga Inc. What they sold was Amiga Club memberships which they combined with an offer to get rebates on those previously mentioned products. None of those products has been officially released yet. Yes, the AmigaOne has started to ship already, but they are just "Earlybirds" as in a prerelease. The rebate was not for any prereleases.

How you make this into "stealing" I really don't know. Their intentions of offering this as a way of supporting them was made perfectly clear from the start and I still haven't heard of anyone beeing denied the ability to get a refund (as in no rebate, just the money back and a cancelation of the club membership). I once heard about three individuals (out of approx. 1000) that wanted to have their money back through a certain classact towards Amiga Inc., but I doubt they even tried simply asking Amiga Inc. first.
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 34 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Tigger on 21-May-2003 03:39 GMT
In reply to Comment 32 (Ketzer):
>>>>
theres still no proof that mceven _did_ say that.
>>>>

I dont know who mceven is, if we are talking about Bill McEwen, then why doesnt Fleecy say he didnt say that. Thats the crux of the question, and fleecy completely ignores it. Why?? Because Bill did say that under oath, there is no reason for Bolten Peck to lie, when the transcript comes out, its going to be in Black and White, why lie when you have won your case (as Bolten has). On the other hand, we have Fleecy, who is going to claim at some point in the future that he didnt answer the question that way and that Mike or Ray altered his answer (and other answers) to make them "lies". Its not a new tactic, but we'll have people defending Fleecy no matter how many people he screws over.
-Tig
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 35 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 21-May-2003 12:50 GMT
In reply to Comment 34 (Tigger):
"...and fleecy completely ignores it. Why??"

Eeeeh... But of course you must understand why they don't talk about legal issues like this in public? "Everything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law...", remember? I doubt it was such a wise decision to talk about this in public by that former Amiga Inc. employee to begin with. I doubt even more that he deliberated this with his lawyer and that his lawyer would agree to doing such public statements. Wether the statements are true or not doesn't matter, these kind of public statements can have devastating effects on all possible legal proceedings in the future. You see, even if he thinks this case has been settled, what if Amiga Inc. would take some kind of counter action or if he would end up in a similar situation with a different employer? Everything is possible and therefore it's not a very good idea to make yourself known for saying certain things in public.
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 36 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Tigger on 21-May-2003 18:33 GMT
In reply to Comment 35 (samface):
>>>>>
Eeeeh... But of course you must understand why they don't talk about legal issues like this in public? "Everything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law...", remember? I doubt it was such a wise decision to talk about this in public by that former Amiga Inc. employee to begin with. I doubt even more that he deliberated this with his lawyer and that his lawyer would agree to doing such public statements.
>>>>>
Because Fleecy is lying and he as an officer of the company can't lie about what a fellow officer of the company under oath. Fleecy could say, Bill said that under oath (which is true), its hard for that to be used against them, its public knowledge Bill McEwen said that, why Fleecy keeps trying to imply he doesnt know about it, cant comment about it, etc, is just trying to fool the Amiga Community, much like the silly Trios comments about the Auction.

>>>>>
Wether the statements are true or not doesn't matter, these kind of public statements can have devastating effects on all possible legal proceedings in the future.
>>>>>
Lets just call it like it really is, Bill said that under oath, Fleecy doesnt want to admit that because it makes his comments earlier all lies, so hes implying that he cant talk about what Bill said under oath, even though everyone knows Bill contradicted him under oath. When the transcript comes out (and it will) are you going to still be the apologist for Fleecy??/

>>>>
You see, even if he thinks this case has been settled, what if Amiga Inc. would take some kind of counter action or if he would end up in a similar situation with a different employer? Everything is possible and therefore it's not a very good idea to make yourself known for saying certain things in public.
>>>>>
I'm sorry Sam, I realize fleecy is coaching you and all, but this post is just getting silly. Amiga Inc cant do any counter action, they lost the suit in December, their time to appeal is over, they still didnt pay, Bill had to come and explain why they couldnt pay the legal debt owed to Bolten Peck. Thats not the only debt they owe, do you still believe the auction next month is because they decided to sell stuff??
-Tig
Fleecy talks again (but not about lawsuits) : Comment 37 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 23-May-2003 12:02 GMT
In reply to Comment 36 (Tigger):
1. Where is the proof of Bill McEwan saying this in court? No, the mere words in an internet based forum such as ANN.lu from someone that claims to be Bolton Peck (for the sake of not assuming anything) is not proof. AFAIK, it could just as well be Bill Buck, spoofing as Bolton, saying this for slinging yet another handfull of mud at the competition. Public knowledge? No, it's a public rumour yet to be verified. Get it verified with actual, solid proof and I might reconsider.

2. I do NOT know Fleecy in person. My comments has no other influence besides my own, period. Claiming otherwise would be rather ignorant since noone could possibly know this better than me.

3. What I believe is really not the point here. I'm trying to bring some form of objectivity in all this rather than stating Yet Another Theory(TM). By objectivity I mean restrain one self from jumping into conclusions and stick to the facts. So far, you have no facts what so ever to back your theories up with, period.
Anonymous, there are 37 items in your selection
Back to Top