"BCS" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]... >> You will be identified by what you associate with. It's not a matter >> of passive "leave and let a guy have his space." He chose to >> connect himself with the D language this way! > > I think that asking him to adjust the root page and stuff relating to D > might be reasonable, but a direct e-mail or a comment on his blog would be > a better choice than a post here. > >> In his favour: >> >> bearophile is polite and consistant in his approach to posting here. >> I appreciate that. Now I *request* that he'll just take the step >> further and somehow help us not have any association of this material >> with D! >> >> Bearophile... you appear to have some supporters here, so you >> apparently have nothing to be ashamed of, although I disagree. But I >> think you are hurting D by allowing your lifestyle choices to be >> associated with the language design. I ask you to please change this. >> > > I will agree with you on this. >
If I created a website that sometimes discussed Joe's Pizza Parlor and at other times posted drawings of cigarettes and even included my site's homepage link in my signature at Joe's Pizza Parlor Internet Message Board, then anyone who took that as an indication that Joe's Pizza Parlor endorses either smoking, non-smoking, or the act of making cigarette-related drawings, would clearly be a complete nut (Not that Joe's Pizza Parlor necessarily endorses, condemns, or is ambivalent towards nuts of either the human or tree-grown variety, or any other variety that may have ever existed, does exit, will exist or doesn't, didn't and/or never will exist). I see no reason for the same principle not to apply here. This is the same pulling-imaginary-connections-out-of-thin-air kind of thinking that, in the early days of the web, led National Public Radio to pull that ridiculous stunt of trying to prohibit anyone from linking to their site.
