Not compliant with forum's rules issue

[Just]

Hi,

A thread of mine on the forum was closed before being answered, because it was by some manner accidentally linked to a way to bypass Windows 7 activation within the first 30 days, even if my trouble was not related to Windows activation. It makes no doubt that the moderator took the right decision at closing my thread and that the mistake was mine : I should have focused only on the problem which I wanted to get fixed and not have digressed on Windows activation considerations, which had likely nothing to do with the issue itself.

I may post once again about the same issue within a new thread, not making any reference to Windows activation does and don't. However, I wonder if this is compliant with the rules of the forum ? In other words, may I push back to the forum an issue which got discarded by a moderator just by removing the part that caused my thread to be closed prematurely ?

The post I am referring to his available here : WIN 7 - slmgr - "ActiveX component can't create object" error (code 800A01AD)

The new phrasing which I may use to describe the same issue might be like that : On my machine, the slmgr tool ceased to respond correctly. Typing slmgr /dlv or even slmgr alone produces such an output : activex component can't create object 'scripting.dictionary'. The re-registration of scrrun.dll did not help.

Is that way of doing complies with the rules of the forum ?

Thank you for your advices.

 

[jcgriff2]

I agree with Digerati's decision to close the thread.

 

[Digerati]

A thread of mine on the forum was closed before being answered, because it was by some manner accidentally linked to a way to bypass Windows 7 activation within the first 30 days

Ummm, you clearly stated you "extended the trial mode" so not sure what you mean by "some manner accidentally linked". The Microsoft article Activate Windows on this computer says on the very first line, "You must activate Windows within 30 days of installation." There is no mention of rearm.

And the EULA clearly states (their bold),

Unless the software is activated, you have no right to use the software after the time permitted for activation. This is to prevent its unlicensed use. You are not permitted to bypass or circumvent activation.

I note there are many things with Windows that are technically possible, but not legally. Transferring OEM Windows licenses to a new computer is a perfect example; easy to do, but never legal. I also note many versions of Windows, including Windows "Server" software share many (if not millions!) lines of code. The license for Windows Server 2008, for example does allow you to use -rearm. But the license for Windows 7 specifically prohibits it.

Please note the ToS of this site we all agree to abide by when we join. I note specifically under "Site Rules For Topics, Posts, and other Content", it says (my bold added),

2.You agree that you will not post any messages that are illegal, obscene, threatening, defamatory, invasive of privacy, racially, ethnically or otherwise harmful or injurious to third parties. This includes information about or links to any site that contains information intended to violate the Terms of Service or End User License Agreement of any service, product, or application as well as requesting or providing information on hacks or cracks.

So if "by some manner accidently linked" was just a Freudian slip and you did not mean to reveal you were using the software in violation of the EULA (which BTW, you agreed to by your continued use of the software after installation), then I am sorry, but as they say, you can't unring the bell. And we cannot in good conscious therefore, help anyone with software we know they are using in violation of those terms.

So while I appreciate you asking here for guidance on this issue, my advice is to purchase a legal Windows license, or install one of the many free versions of Linux. Thank you for your understanding.

 

[Just]

Hi Digerati,

I see nothing but commun sens and the will to behave fairly in all that you wrote above. I agree with you. The version of Windows that got installed on my machine is not sold anymore since late 2013. The turn I may take is to buy one license from second hand. In practical terms, that is all but obvious. I would be interested in getting guidance on such a purchase. I guess it worth to open a separate thread.