It's probably worth mentioning, to be fair to Reindl, that he can no longer respond publically to this list..
Thanks, Kiall Sent from my phone. On Apr 7, 2012 8:07 p.m., "Maciek Sokolewicz" <maciek.sokolew...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 07-04-2012 03:10, John Crenshaw wrote: > > Seriously, if you're so angry that you can't even type straight you >> should take a break before responding. Any argument delivered like this >> won't be well received anyway. Take a break, find your place of zen, >> respond when you can be civil. >> >> Do you have no idea how to maintain a level of professionalism when >>>> interacting with the opinions and ideas of other developers? >>>> >>> >>> i have ideas how to do so >>> >>> but i learned over many years that people do not understand that they >>> have >>> really bad ideas if you say freindly "not a godd idea" >>> >> >> Wow. I'm honestly shocked. That's the crux of it isn't it? Trouble is >> that this sort of response violates the rules of the mailing list; rules >> that we all agreed to. It also isn't going to go over well with the type of >> people you have here. This is not a productive communication tactic, this >> is bullying. If you are unwilling to be civil and rational I have to ask, >> why are you even here? >> >> John Crenshaw >> Priacta, Inc. >> > > John, I completely agree with you. I would like to urge Reindl to please, > PLEASE, reconsider your response, at least once, preferably even more > often, before posting it. In this thread alone, you have personally > attacked Tom Boutell for no good reason. Your responses were generally very > very rude, and may easily (and in my opinion rightfuly so) be considered > personal attacks. > > Again, I urge you to reconsider posting such messages. The rules of > conduct on these mailinglists include section on exactly this. They are > there to remind us all to be civil. We do not attack eachother in the way > you do. Instead, you may politely state your view, but do not yell, scream, > or try to force your views on others. > > I would suggest you reread what you have posted, and try to imagine what > it would look like from other reader's points of view. Personally I felt > very unpleasant reading your responses. I was hoping it would be a > one-time-only post, born from anger on a bad day, and that it would be > followed by an apology. Unfortunately, you continued posting this way. > > I am sorry I had to write this. But I feel we should all stand up for > eachother. > > To tell the truth I'd be more excited by a proposal to kill <?php >> entirely, or more realistically, to support an alternate file >> extension that doesn't need it. That would be an interesting option >> for those who want to put "dribs and drabs of PHP sprinkled in HTML" >> completely behind them. >> > > Tom: I agree with your point. I think it would be nice to be able to > create PHP codefiles which do not require the <?php start. But IMO it would > just be a nice-to-have thing, and not really that important, since I'm not > that bothered by using <?php at the start of every file. > > Just my $0.02, > - Tul > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > >
