home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!olivea!apple!cambridge.apple.com!language@skdad.usask.ca
- From: language@skdad.usask.ca
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp.mcl
- Subject: re: John's Flame
- Message-ID: <9301251926.AA08171@waskesiu.USask.ca>
- Date: 25 Jan 93 19:26:56 GMT
- Sender: owner-info-mcl@cambridge.apple.com
- Lines: 28
- Approved: comp.lang.lisp.mcl@Cambridge.Apple.C0M
-
- > Some ideas of yours are interesting. But why don't you express them in
- > a more gentle way? They will be more acceptable. And your messages are
- well vincent, I feel that infact I was being quite gentle. I provided
- references to my sources and I was quite factual. Perhaps the stuff about
- 'BIG' and 'CLUMSY' was a bit too much, however, you may have noticed that
- it did get some attention, and there have been many thoughtful replies
- that address the issues I brought up in a constructive way. The posting
- did in fact have a 'flame' flavour to it, and this was intentional.
- My prime interest here is to be the 'squeeky wheel' and get some people's
- attention in the hope that something infact will be done about MCL's size.
- In a few years, the way media is growing, size will be irrelevant-
- -there's no doubt about it. But, nowadays, a tree-shaker would be a major
- boon to people doing development work. Not all of us have the privledge
- of working in an ivory tower: we have real concerns, real demands,
- and size is an issue. Selling vertical market software isn't often a problem:
- clients are usually willing to go and buy a machine just to run the software
- we make. However, this is not always the case.....
-
- > read by lots of people. Don't abuse that power. Personnaly, I don't
- > like reading aggressive messages like that all day long... I'm saying
- > this with no negative thoughts, I hope you don't feel hurt.
- This isn't an abuse of power, this is a legitimate and well motivated
- attempt to get things done.
-
- > Thanks for your consideration of netetiquette,
- thankyou for being politically correct....
-
- -john
-