| > and imply that any company that does business with Monsanto is in the wrong, is wildly inappropriate and unfair. First, if this applies to any company partnering with Monsanto, they are receiving equal treatment. Secondly, your value judgment of it being "wildly inappropriate" rings hollow. Who determines what's "appropriate"? Usually that terminology is employed when referring to social convention, and social convention is determined by majority opinion. Quoting PG: But the best thing of all is when people call what you're doing inappropriate. I've been hearing this word all my life and I only recently realized that it is, in fact, the sound of the homing beacon. "Inappropriate" is the null criticism. It's merely the adjective form of "I don't like it." http://www.paulgraham.com/marginal.html Ironically, majority opinion here is clearly on the opposing side from where you stand, which seems to inform your "wildly" modifier, being revealing of being upset that your view isn't the prevailing one. As for "unfair", if you read Monsanto's Wikipedia page you'll find out that what it has done to the planet and people fits that description better by ORDERS of magnitude than people deciding not to use some web service or other. Perspective, please. |