> > But, yes, if push came to shove, and I had to choose
> I couldn't disagree more with this sentiment.

I think that some responders have failed to notice the counterfactual
subjunctive in my message.  The context was:

1. Eli said that we were spinning our wheels and just rehashing old
battles, and that that was the fault of "purists."

2. I said that **on the contrary, I think we're making great progress**
but that, since he wanted to draw a line in the sand, I would be proud
to be on the other side of it, **if we weren't able to make progress**.

As I understand it, this is why there are WG1 and WG2 in the first place;
the SC recognized that both people like Eli and people like me are
legitimate members of the Scheme community, with legitimate interests to
pursue in the standardization process.  Eli seemed to want to write me out
of the community, and all I was saying was that I'm proud to be a WG1-Scheme
user rather than a WG2-Scheme user like him.  Not that there shouldn't be
WG2-Scheme.  Just that we WG1-Scheme people aren't blights on the community.

_______________________________________________
r6rs-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss

Reply via email to