Originally Posted by
pdh
Couple of points to make.
First, use of the word "indignant" could be inferred as suggesting that the objectors (and I was - remain - one) were nitpicking rather than simply correctly pointing out that, Second, the persistent use of the phrase "direct positive paper" was grossly misleading, as the paper is nothing of the sort.
I wish you luck with your Galaxy paper, and hope it works out for you, but the fact remains that this KS was promoted inaccurately and misleadingly: Witness the number of people in both this thread and a similar one at APUG who were angry and disappointed when the facts were made clear - not by Galaxy, but by forum members.
Bookmarks