Jay Maynard wrote:

>I'm certain that if someone is able to say why,
>they'll tell us. Until that point, the pestering and haranguing that goes on
>is neither useful nor appropriate.
>
Your expression of certainty is the logical flaw. Take for instance
eduard@..., the poster with the subject line "I can't ipl from my
OS390 V2.10 using hercules V300". He insisted to the list he had a
license for use on Herc, but the latest to me is he (Eduard Fernández)
after double checking admits " I misunderstand that it was possible to
obtain a specific license for Hercules". So its not the case as you
claim that "if someone is able to say why, they'll tell us". Only
through subsequent questioning is one able to get the true story.

>Stop putting words in my mouth, please.
>
>What I was referring to was IBM's lack of any form of personal-use
>licensing, which is an obvious failing to nearly everyone present on the
>hercules-390 list.
>
>
Funny, the poster was referring to the use of the free loan IBM stack
for commercial development purposes on any linux box, but your claim now
is that your comments in response to his post were about personal-use
licensing. I can't imagine how I got so confused ....

>If someone admits they're running the struff unlicensed, then I doubt
>they'll get any help, as the membership of the list has been quite
>adequately sensitized to the issue.
>
Steve Arnet's earlier post of two days ago: "As for running illegal
code on the Hercules platform, I am 100% guilty and am not afraid to
admit such."

Steve Arnet's latest post an hour ago: "Greg responded with a tip for
tracking down my OS/390 2.8 problem(thanks Greg!) and I am currently
trying to do just that.

Seems your certainty is misplaced there too...


>In the absence of such an admission, we
>do not have sufficient information to reach an informed conclusion, and so I
>leave it up to each individual poster to decide.
>

The question was not about the absence of such an admission, but rather
the policy in the PRESENCE of such an admission, such as Steve's above.
So the question remains:

What do you suggest by way of Herc list policy regarding offering
assistance in the event someone reveals that they are using the software
without a license?