[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page
Re: lexis (and tuna's comments)
On 11 Oct 1995, Jack Rogers wrote:
> No one is blaming you! If your school had the "foresight to get Lexis 4 years
> ago when these accounts were available," good for you. In fact, how lucky for
> you. No one has argued (AND WE JUST KEEP POINTING THIS OUT OVER AND OVER) that
> you should be blamed or restricted in your use of Lexis materials. However, in
> your haste to spit on the driver, you have missed the bus.
> Your argument that we should have subscribed four years ago when the deals were
> there misses the point that there are lots of programs (and UT-Tyler is just
> one of them) that came into being THIS year. Hello . . . AT&T, directory
> assistance for time machines, please.
You are wrong. There are people who have been saying that Lexis use
should be restricted. If I recall correctly that was the point of this
whole thread. There used to be "sale" on lexis accounts, it was called
the educational account. It is no longer on "sale". That constitutes
> I'm not "pissy" because "other people were perceptive enough to get good
> deals," Greg. I'm simply suggesting that Lexis did NOT make a business error;
> and therefore, are NOT blameless in this current situation. It should be no
> surprise to Lexis that they found "educational accounts" to be money losers.
> Wake up, Greg. They were a new service; and as such, offered incredible deals
> to get "placed" in the market. Once their "fix" was secured, they simply
> dropped the low cost "buy ins." Once profits were secured through market
> acceptance, they simply decided to cut their temporary lose policy of
> educational accounts. If you don't understand this strategy, a little research
> on Walmart and/or HMOs should get you up to speed quickly.
As near as I can tell, your mad because Lexis is ought to make money. If
you are surprised by this, you must have been living in a cave. Like it
or not corporations do things to make a profit. If you have a problem
with this, boycott Lexis (and Walmart and HMO's). Yes, ideally Lexis
should provide "equal access" (whatever that may be). However, their
price schedule (which doesn't differ much from airlines or hotels or
rental companies) isn't a reason I shouldn't get to use Lexis.
> Our side of the thread argues that a service should provide EQUAL ACCESS. We
> aren't asking you to feel sorry for us. We don't want you to give up what you
> were lucky enough to get. BUT, if you really want competition and aren't
> afraid of the have nots, why do you defend Lexis and refuse equal access? My
> offer stands. ANYONE WHO DOES NOT FEEL THAT LEXIS GIVES THEM AN ADVANTAGE AND
> REMAINS CONVINCED THAT LEXIS WOULD NOT MAKE MY TEAM MORE COMPETITIVE -- PLEASE
> SELL ME YOUR LICENSE. Until your side of the thread can answer that argument,
> then you miss the point.
No one is disputing the idea that Lexis provides a strategic advantage to
teams. My argument is that you should not hold members of the debate
community responsible for the actions of a corporation. This whole thread
has been about the movement to ban Lexis (presumably because they are
discriminatory). Why should my teams be denied a valuable research tool
just because you do not agree with the policies of a corporation. If you
are truly interested in equal access, I am quite sure you would be
willing to send a check from your travel budget to schools who have a
smaller travel budget than you so that everyone has "equal access" to
> We're not blaming the other passengers on the bus, we're not even blaming the
> driver who just enforces company policy. We just want equal access. We blame
> the transportation company that refuses us the right to ride.
Then don't get mad at us when we read Lexis cards. If I ever hear of a
team losing a round on a "lexis critique" I will be sorely disappointed.
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (email@example.com)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page