Recently Paul Robinson wrote regarding vendors on the net:
 
> I do want to hear what the vendors have to say.
 
Since I wrote the original message (that sparked the recent
discussions) in response to a question asking for a comparison
between VoxBlast and VoxelView, and given the request by Paul
Robinson, I would like to offer the following comments:
 
1)  As a vendor we consider it a privilege to be on the net, not
a right.  We recognize the rules of etiquette and hope that we can
be of service to other participants.  I hope that other vendors
abide by these conditions so that the opportunities continue.
 
2) My experience with other mailing lists is that they allow
vendors to participate in discussions as long as they follow two
rules: a) they must identify themselves as vendors and b) they must
constrain their comments to issues at hand - no sales pitches.
This seems appropriate to me.
 
3) As others have mentioned, we also believe vendors comments can
be of value since we know our products best.
 
4) It's a two-way street.  Not only do researchers have the
advantages of vendor's input regarding their products, but vendors
get valuable knowledge about cutting edge research and market
trends.  As most vendors, our business depends as much on customer
support and good R & D as it does on selling products.  Being on
the net is an efficient way for all of us to communicate.
 
5)  Finally, the issue that people feel most uneasy about has to
do with the perception that vendors are in it for the money, and
that the net is for the free exchange of information.  While it is
true that we must make a profit, we also have other motivations.
As individuals it is just as important for us to feel we are doing
something positive and making a contribution to scientific progress
as it is to make money.  As long as the money motive is a secondary
consideration, vendor's contribution to the net seem highly
worthwhile.