Eric Mrozek said -
>Bryan, this is an open list - you won't get anyone to agree to your
>personal terms. You'd be best off to just post your thoughts and don't
>mind the critique, whether it's meant personally or not.
Well, some of the critique has been extremely personal. Of course I'm going to post my ideas as to what should be done; give me a few days to collect my thoughts. I was just having a dig at Richard Robinson who, twice in this thread, had said things along the lines of "I expect you would say..." followed by an absurd statement bearing no resemblance to anything I ever have said or ever would say. He is an intelligent chap who knows what he is doing and is simply trying to score debating points. I can't be bothered to waste my time on that sort of thing.
During my time on this list I have seen several people arrive bright eyed and bushy tailed, full of enthusiasm and ideas only to retreat in exasperation a few weeks later after a tirade of "Well, what about..." and "That won't work..." and "We like it the way it is." and "Well, I don't need it so I won't implement it in my software." from the establishment who seem to think they own abc. If that sort of thing doesn't work, they are quite prepared to resort to personal abuse or use such refined techniques as ignoring the content of a posting while picking up on the spelling mistakes (I have deliberately left a few in this email for those who like that sort of thing). They have the ultimate response for irrefutable arguments or awkward questions. They ignore them. I have never known anyone say to anyone "OK. You have convinced me. You are right."
From comments made by Laura Conrad, it would appear that this attitude continues in the inner sanctum of the standards committee which explains why it has failed to achieve anything.
So here is my first proposal -
Members of this list will commit themselves to treating other people's ideas with respect and answering them in a rational way no matter how much they disagree with them.
Let's try and raise the level of debate out of the school playground.
You never know; it might just work.
Bryan Creer
- Re: [abcusers] dynamics (was) Laura Conrad
- Re: [abcusers] dynamics (was) Taral
- Re: [abcusers] dynamics (was) Gianni Cunich
- Re: [abcusers] dynamics (was) Simon Wascher
- Re: [abcusers] dynamics (was) jhoerr
- Re: [abcusers] dynamics (was) Gianni Cunich
- Re: [abcusers] dynamics (was) Laura Conrad
- Re: [abcusers] requesting goodies from developer... Jack Campin
- Re: [abcusers] requesting goodies from devel... Gianni Cunich
- Re: [abcusers] requesting goodies from d... Jack Campin
- Re: [abcusers] dynamics (was) Bryancreer
- Re: [abcusers] dynamics (was) Frank Nordberg
- Re: [abcusers] dynamics (was) Bryancreer
- Re: [abcusers] dynamics (was) James Allwright
- Re: [abcusers] dynamics (was) Laurie Griffiths
- Re: [abcusers] dynamics (was) Bryancreer
- Re: [abcusers] dynamics (was) Anselm Lingnau
- Re: [abcusers] dynamics (was) Richard Robinson
- Re: [abcusers] dynamics (was) Wendy Galovich
- Re: [abcusers] dynamics (was) Bryancreer