Re: UL Required to get License

["Bob Worthy" <securinc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> >  I am not a UL listed company and never intend to be.

Bubble Butt wrote:
>
> Too much of a commitment to standards for your taste, eh?
>
First, poll the audience and see how many here are UL, other than some of
the CS participants. You will find it is not very popular, however, there is
a difference in the commitment to standards, especially when they provide a
choice and choosing to pay a membership fee to a club, which in one aspect,
has out lived its usefulness in certain areas of UL's total picture. You
obviously have never been involved to know the difference, demonstrated by
some of your post to the subject. You just like to be argumentative, whether
you know about a subject of not, fueled by anyone elses opinions. It is OK
to be a self proclaimed mavin but it is pretty obvious that you will go down
in this newsgroup history as simply a "legend in your own mind."