Evan Leibovitch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Bill Moran wrote: > > >I don't think 19 is a large enough sampling to even consider thinking about > >the results. Based on your rate of response, how long will it take before > >you have a few hundred? > > > > Pot. Kettle. Black. Playing a numbers game is hardly a helpful reply, > given this program's own scarcity of quantifiable demand. > > In any case, the comment is completely missing my point. I'm not asking > anyone to consider my suggestions _because_ of the poll; I mentioned it > only as being a catalyst for deeper questions. Yet instead of addressing > the real issues, the response is to attack the premise under which they > were raised. That kind of deflection is unfortunate.
My point was not to deflect anything. I'm simply pointing out that a survey of 19 is hardly anything to use as a basis for anything. I did not "attack" you, and have no intentions of doing so. I think your survey is an excellent idea, and I'm honestly curious about how long it will take you to get a sampling large enough to be worth looking at. If anything is "unfortunate", it's that the world we live in is so full of conflict that an honest question can be misinterpreted as an attack. -- Bill Moran Potential Technologies http://www.potentialtech.com _______________________________________________ BSDCert mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nycbug.org/mailman/listinfo/bsdcert
