> >1. The work would be done on a subcontract bases for a fee of $25 US an hour.
>
> Sounds like an opportunity for anyone that doesn't have to earn a living
> from this type of work.  In other words,  if you have a real job that pays
> your salary etc.  then you can work evenings and weekends to undercut the
> people who do this as their sole means of support.

In all fairness to the original author, such jobs sometimes present a very
useful opportunity to those who are engaged in college or have not yet entered
the professional workforce.  Someone who seeks to hire contractors at such a
rate must be often willing to accept people with minimal experience (since
most experienced programmers would demand more) but may provide opportunities
that such people would otherwise not have.

Had you merely posted to the list that:

[1] The original author might find better people if he offered more
  or
[2] That potential respondents should be aware that better jobs may be
    available to them

then I would have thought such remarks were reasonably appropriate.  Your show
of offense, however, was IMHO uncalled for.  You seem to imply that there is
a monolithic market for contract labor when there is, in fact, quite a range.
Timex has not, and will not, push Rolex out of the market despite its vastly
lower price.  For Rolex to criticize Timex for charging to little would be
absurd; Timex simply fills a different market need.  Similarly with lower-
priced consultants.  Criticizing someone for seeking a contractor from a
different market segment than that which you occupy is IMHO unmannerly and
inappropriate.