point of saying that he eats his cats. All he's done is describe in as much detail as
he is allowed by company policy how a certain portion of macromedia.com is coded, and
publically made available the guidelines he and his team used for that and a small
sample of code demonstrating how he prefers to handle persistance and data access. I
don't see that as "opinionated" - it's just factual with a welcome dash of openness.
Maybe it begins to look opinionated in the shadow cast by others' opinions. But i
don't see how one could categorize Sean's blog or posts as characteristically
opinionated. They aren't, any more than your posts are opinionated when you state
things like
" 'var' scoped variables don't die when the function exits, the reference to them is
what dies."
I find Sean's posts and writings as balanced in the options they present and as
factual as they could be. Sure, often in programming there are varying approaches to
the same goal, but those approaches are both facts. If we delete the facts from such
statements, then there's nothing left.
Then you would have to write things like ... " 'var' scoped variables may behave
differently than you think they might, but it would be best if you find out for
yourself. "
That's not going to help anyone. Not you, not me, not your company.
Here's a disclaimer you can put on the bottom of your email, since you don't seem to
have one yet and it seems like you certainly need one, because you often seem to know
what you're talking about and come up with lots of good ideas and suggestions. It
covers the eventuality that someone may read one of your posts online.
"If you are offended by coding guidelines or best practice statements or suggestions,
or under the age of 21, or if viewing coding guidelines or best practice statements or
suggestions is illegal in the state or country in which you reside, please leave this
site or delete this email immediately."
Ok ... i've said what i wanted to say.
:) nando
-----Original Message-----
From: Barney Boisvert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 6:37 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Macromedia.com running under Mach II ...
I definitely see you point, Nando, but at the same time, the amazing
fixation our society has on sueing eachother over frivolities demands such
asinine disclaimers to pervade our discussions. Have you ever checked out
the signatures of certain people who post to the list? I started seeing one
recently that was two full paragraphs long, and there are several others
that are a paragraph. I'm not counting the ones that are contact info or
marketing, just the disclaimers.
Also worth noting that Sean is one of the few (only?) high-profile
Macromedians who doesn't use the MM blog system in favor of paying for his
own hosting on a separate server. He does this specifically so he's NOT
under MM's thumb about what he says on his site and blog. I don't know if
that was a Sean instigated position from the get go, or if he started being
opinionated and MM told him to cool it. It doesn't matter, though.
The point is that they have concerns over what the public view of their
opinions are as a company. It's definitely a valid concern. All Christian
was saying is that what Sean says is what Sean says, it's not necessarily
what Macromedia says. Chances are good that they are one and the same,
particularly on things of a technical nature regarding MM projects.
Consider if you said that the software your company develops is top of the
line stuff, perfectly suited to what it's designed for. Then you also said
that you like to eat cats. Your company would want protection from the
latter, even if it meant losing the potentially valuable endorsement of the
former statement.
Cheers,
barneyb
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nando [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 9:13 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: Macromedia.com running under Mach II ...
>
> Christian,
>
> Sorry to wake this one up again ... but your statement here
> really concerned me. I've
> struggled on and off nearly the whole day trying to get
> subscribed to this list so
> that my posts go through. Let's see if it works this time ...
>
> <snip>
> ... when Sean comes back, I will discuss this issue with
> him... his actions should not
> be interpreted as an official Macromedia endorsement of any
> one project over another.
> </snip>
>
> How would you manage these interpretations? How can anyone do
> that? All you can do is
> make yourself or your company or your project as bland as
> possible, a white wall in a
> white room, in a misguided effort to cut down on
> "interpretation". In the end it just
> doesn't work - those who want in a certain moment to
> interpret will still interpret.
> In fact, in my experience, they (we) will interpret more.
>
> I personally appreciate the added color these days, the more
> personal access from
> people working at MM. And i think a lot of other people do as
> well. It is true that at
> times personal preferences will show through in what you guys
> present, but i would
> MUCH MUCH rather have a chance to take a good look at the
> personal preferences of some
> of the experienced and talented people who are working at
> Macromedia, than be
> shielded from them in an effort to be "neutral".
>
> If neutrality is a virtue in this regard, then Michael here
> on his own list should be
> equally careful professing opinions and preferences (about
> Macromedia's use of
> frameworks for instance), because his opinion of course
> carries more weight than
> someone like me.
>
> Likewise, Matt is the president of a software company. Matt's
> opinions certainly carry
> more weight in the innocent blue eyes of more junior
> developers like myself. Why is
> Montara Software or House of Fusion any different from
> Macromedia in this regard? They
> aren't.
>
> The way this thread presents the issue makes it look like IF
> Sean and his team had
> decided to use the Mach-II framework because they thought it
> technically the best
> decision, (and i'm sure they made the decision on technical
> merits, because no other
> motive makes any sense for them at all - ie, THEY were not
> susceptible to being unduly
> influenced by Macromedia's use of Mach-II)
> ...
> THEN they should have hidden the fact from us. Does that help
> anyone? Does encouraging
> a policy of hiding what you know and do because you are
> talented and experienced - and
> therefore your reputation carries a certain added weight of
> validity - balance
> anything? Make anything fair? Is that moral somehow?
>
> I don't think so.
>
> So before this thread drifts off into dreamland, i wanted to
> weigh in on this and say
> i find the openness and personal access to and from some of
> the tech people at MM to
> be right on track in a variety of aspects, and very helpful -
> good for everyone. I
> wouldn't want to see a hollow "unfair influence" argument
> dampening that. If you
> follow that argument to its conclusion, then anyone in the
> community that gains a
> reputation of being experienced and knowledgeable should hide
> everything that they are
> doing from the rest of us so that we are not unduly
> influenced. And that's just a
> negative spiral for everyone involved and does not make sense at all.
>
> Nando
>
>
> >Well, in the interest of putting this thread to bed, let me
> try to wrap
> >things up by saying that when Sean comes back, I will discuss this
> >issue with him. Although I don't have a problem with
> Macromedia's web
> >team using Mach II or Sean contributing to Mach II development, his
> >actions should not be interpreted as an official Macromedia
> endorsement
> >of any one project over another.
> >
> >Christian
>
>
>
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
