So you make the claim about this issue hurting "the future of computer science", and here we are, with you unable to back up such a epochal event with one reference. Maybe MS went and deleted all internet pages related to this?
Extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence, Carl Sagan said, but you're unable to even provide ordinary evidence except your personal experience which even you admit you don't remember exactly, and everyone knows how it could be because DOS config varied from machine to machine with a lot of powerful settings in config.sys and himem.sys, just two examples.
What is certain, and what has been documented, is that MS did put that AARD code into it's products. If you've actually read up on it, you'll realize that Win3.1 is not the ONLY place it showed up. Win3.1 is the only place where I personally encountered it.
All I can read on it says the code didn't prevent the Windows install from going forward and that it ran silently even if it was present, except in a pre-beta release. Can you provide any web page that contradicts the above? If you're unable to, are you willing to retract your claim? I don't want spend more time trying to dig more facts to contradict an obviously anti-MS person on Slashdot who won't change their mind regardless.
Anyway, don't worry, no one here is going to read this subthread, none of my posts have been modded up like yours have been, and people reading your earlier posts will continue to believe in and propagate the same half truths and misinformation that will mislead more people who don't check the facts for themselves, and the cycle continues. I guess I must just be happy that I am not hit with downmods for going against the grain yet(bracing for them anyway), it's a struggle to keep my karma above the threshold on here.