Re: lacking follow-through
On 13 Sep, 08:38, Terry Reedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > His recent posts have generally been quite different from those of some > months ago. Even he recognizes that they were somewhat weird and has > tried to do better. And I think we should at least go along with people if they're willing to raise their level of discussion. I'd much rather read messages at the level of the one which initiated this thread than idiotic, supposedly humorous responses about contributors being "bots". > Did he ever make any degrading attacks on people like the above, to > deserve receiving such? This reminds me of my elementary school, where > people who made social mistakes were sometimes never allowed to recover > but were dumped on for years. I get this impression as well: that "seniority" gives some kind of right to dump on anyone, and that we should all find this a source of amusement. It seems more like American high school, Hollywood style, if you ask me. Paul -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
Carl Banks wrote: I'm surprised there is anyone who still gives castironpi credit for being fully human. His recent posts have generally been quite different from those of some months ago. Even he recognizes that they were somewhat weird and has tried to do better. Did he ever make any degrading attacks on people like the above, to deserve receiving such? This reminds me of my elementary school, where people who made social mistakes were sometimes never allowed to recover but were dumped on for years. tjr -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
On Sep 12, 8:16 am, Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > castironpi wrote: > > On Sep 7, 5:03 pm, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Mon, 08 Sep 2008 07:34:55 +1000, James Mills wrote: > >>> This is the strangest post I've seen > >>> since I've joined this list (only > >>> recently). What the ? > >> Yeah, castironpi sometimes doesn't make much sense. Maybe because it's a > >> bot!? :-) > > >> Ciao, > >> Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch > > > No, I'm legit, and I believe my complaint is. That's all I can > > guarantee anyway. While I'm still not a vet on Usenet, I'm still > > disappointed so far. Though I should be flattered for my logic to be > > ever compared to an A.I.'s. > > Your various outpourings appear so rambling and ill-conceived that > silence is often the only polite response. > > If you are flattered to be compared to an AI you must come from the same > race as Mr. Spock in Star Trek. I'm surprised there is anyone who still gives castironpi credit for being fully human. Carl Banks -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
On Sep 12, 12:35 pm, Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Steve Holden wrote: > > The defence rests. > > can you please stop quoting that guy, so we don't have to killfile you > as well... Guy? Carl Banks -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Steve Holden wrote: >> >> The defence rests. > >can you please stop quoting that guy, so we don't have to killfile you >as well... +1 -- Aahz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ "Argue for your limitations, and sure enough they're yours." --Richard Bach -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
Steve Holden wrote: The defence rests. can you please stop quoting that guy, so we don't have to killfile you as well... -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
Aaron "Castironpi" Brady wrote: > On Sep 12, 7:23 am, Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> castironpi wrote: >> >> If you are flattered to be compared to an AI you must come from the same >> race as Mr. Spock in Star Trek. > > No, I said 'for my logic to compared'. Speaking of which, I think you > excluded the possibility of diligent and ethical human, which meets > the criteria (of being flattered to be compared to an AI)... unless > Vulcan is just a synonym for it. If you want a discussion of why a > diligent and ethical human takes pride in / devotes effort to logic, > that's another topic that I'm happy to engage on. > >> You aren't entitled to require discussion of your ideas and proposals. > > No, but you are entitled to human interaction. If your case is that I > should seek mine face-to-face instead of keyboard-to-screen, you > probably have a point. > > ... > >> [...] >> >>> For example, I sometimes hear people talk about salary as though it >>> were social approval, and vice versa. Even though the analogy doesn't >>> hold in every case generally, it is still a good way to express >>> yourself in many contexts, and especially when the more precise word >>> isn't on the tip of your tongue. >> Perhaps under those circumstances the better choice is to hold off >> posting and do some research until you come up with the proper word. > > Yes I know. Good thing everyone at Mozilla agrees with you, and > Thesaurus.Com is included in Firefox's quicksearch engines. > >> Precision in the expression of ideas encourages debate, whereas sloppy >> "just write what you feel" is likely to result in hostile responses, as >> it causes the perception that you value your own time more than that of >> the people you attempt to engage. > > But the value of expression and self-expression can outweigh the value > of debate, even in so stuffy a setting as a Usenet group. Make time > for both or stifle your emotions. Do you hold I should be speaking > from the heart more or less? > > Regardless, you've contradicted yourself: > > 1) "just write what you feel" is likely to result in hostile responses > 2) If you are flattered to be compared to an AI you must [not be > human] > > Assume you, Steve, do as you say (practice what you preach). You do > not write either "just what you feel", nor anything that can be > compared to an A.I. Define the goal of A.I. to be logic and reasoned > "post-impulsive" deliberation (my title to define as I voiced the > flattery). Then conclude you don't post to the newsgroup. Observe > you do, and reach an absurdity. What premise do you retract? > > Knowing nothing of your background in philosophy or otherwise, it may > be a little unfair to put words in your mouth like that. It's a deep > problem (that yes, does have implications on the "diligent and > ethical" issue above) of human nature and the human condition: If > you're not rational, then you're a man. > > Besides, it is better to complain to the group that it is dropping my > posts than to anyone else. > The defence rests. regards Steve -- Steve Holden+1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119 Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
On Sep 12, 7:23 am, Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > castironpi wrote: > > If you are flattered to be compared to an AI you must come from the same > race as Mr. Spock in Star Trek. No, I said 'for my logic to compared'. Speaking of which, I think you excluded the possibility of diligent and ethical human, which meets the criteria (of being flattered to be compared to an AI)... unless Vulcan is just a synonym for it. If you want a discussion of why a diligent and ethical human takes pride in / devotes effort to logic, that's another topic that I'm happy to engage on. > You aren't entitled to require discussion of your ideas and proposals. No, but you are entitled to human interaction. If your case is that I should seek mine face-to-face instead of keyboard-to-screen, you probably have a point. ... > [...] > > > For example, I sometimes hear people talk about salary as though it > > were social approval, and vice versa. Even though the analogy doesn't > > hold in every case generally, it is still a good way to express > > yourself in many contexts, and especially when the more precise word > > isn't on the tip of your tongue. > > Perhaps under those circumstances the better choice is to hold off > posting and do some research until you come up with the proper word. Yes I know. Good thing everyone at Mozilla agrees with you, and Thesaurus.Com is included in Firefox's quicksearch engines. > Precision in the expression of ideas encourages debate, whereas sloppy > "just write what you feel" is likely to result in hostile responses, as > it causes the perception that you value your own time more than that of > the people you attempt to engage. But the value of expression and self-expression can outweigh the value of debate, even in so stuffy a setting as a Usenet group. Make time for both or stifle your emotions. Do you hold I should be speaking from the heart more or less? Regardless, you've contradicted yourself: 1) "just write what you feel" is likely to result in hostile responses 2) If you are flattered to be compared to an AI you must [not be human] Assume you, Steve, do as you say (practice what you preach). You do not write either "just what you feel", nor anything that can be compared to an A.I. Define the goal of A.I. to be logic and reasoned "post-impulsive" deliberation (my title to define as I voiced the flattery). Then conclude you don't post to the newsgroup. Observe you do, and reach an absurdity. What premise do you retract? Knowing nothing of your background in philosophy or otherwise, it may be a little unfair to put words in your mouth like that. It's a deep problem (that yes, does have implications on the "diligent and ethical" issue above) of human nature and the human condition: If you're not rational, then you're a man. Besides, it is better to complain to the group that it is dropping my posts than to anyone else. > > regards > Steve > -- > Steve Holden +1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119 > Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
castironpi wrote: [...] > For example, I sometimes hear people talk about salary as though it > were social approval, and vice versa. Even though the analogy doesn't > hold in every case generally, it is still a good way to express > yourself in many contexts, and especially when the more precise word > isn't on the tip of your tongue. Perhaps under those circumstances the better choice is to hold off posting and do some research until you come up with the proper word. Precision in the expression of ideas encourages debate, whereas sloppy "just write what you feel" is likely to result in hostile responses, as it causes the perception that you value your own time more than that of the people you attempt to engage. regards Steve -- Steve Holden+1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119 Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
castironpi wrote: > On Sep 7, 5:03 pm, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Mon, 08 Sep 2008 07:34:55 +1000, James Mills wrote: >>> This is the strangest post I've seen >>> since I've joined this list (only >>> recently). What the ? >> Yeah, castironpi sometimes doesn't make much sense. Maybe because it's a >> bot!? :-) >> >> Ciao, >> Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch > > No, I'm legit, and I believe my complaint is. That's all I can > guarantee anyway. While I'm still not a vet on Usenet, I'm still > disappointed so far. Though I should be flattered for my logic to be > ever compared to an A.I.'s. > Your various outpourings appear so rambling and ill-conceived that silence is often the only polite response. If you are flattered to be compared to an AI you must come from the same race as Mr. Spock in Star Trek. > Maybe the ideas are not that groundbreaking, but they still have been > dropped instead of critiqued. Problem. You aren't entitled to require discussion of your ideas and proposals. The usual way of obtaining responses is to engage in a dialog, responding intelligently and directly to any criticism or discussion. But it's often difficult to discern what point you are trying to make. This may be a linguistic issue, or it may be because you are running some bizarre experiment. The jury appears to still be out on that question. regards Steve -- Steve Holden+1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119 Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
On Sep 8, 2:21 pm, Grant Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2008-09-08, Chris Rebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 9:03 AM, Eric Wertman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> To expand on this a little bit, I've been subscribed to this > >> group for a couple of months, but there seems to be a bit more > >> gray area between what would go to a 'python-dev' group and a > >> 'python-user' group. Long debates about language features and > >> abstract ideas would appeal to the former, but not the latter. > >> Certainly I fall into the user category.. I'm pretty happy > >> with python, and generally just adjust to it's design and > >> features, rather than spend lots of time on whether they are > >> 'right' or could be 'better'. /shrug > > > Yeah, suggestions about changing the language are much better > > suited to the more-specific Python-ideas or Python-3000 > > mailinglists than the general-purpose c.l.p > > I don't think anybody here in c.l.p minds reading suggestions > for language features/changes, but often what the poster in > question writes is just an incomprehensible collection of > vaguely philosophical-sounding metaphores and similes > reminiscent of a hoax paper submitted as a joke to a > post-modern "journal" of some pretend science or other. > > -- > Grant Edwards grante Yow! Used staples are good > at with SOY SAUCE! > visi.com I would almost say Grant's criticism is too harsh, and I don't think 'incomprehensible metaphors' is really a problem on Py-Dev or CL-Py, though I feel that sometimes people aren't posting in earnest. I certainly have heard some in real life though. In some cases, I have observed that people are expressing things that they genuinely have perceived, and merely haven't applied the logic necessary to notice the inconsistency in their metaphor, which is the thing that makes them 'incomprehensible' to mature logicians like Grant. For example, I sometimes hear people talk about salary as though it were social approval, and vice versa. Even though the analogy doesn't hold in every case generally, it is still a good way to express yourself in many contexts, and especially when the more precise word isn't on the tip of your tongue. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
Eric Wertman wrote: Perhaps the wrong idea of what the group is. I would have thought that if one had a sufficiently developed idea and wanted to have it / formally/ rejected, rather than merely sniped at, then writting a PEP would be more apposite than posting to c.l.py. It's fine to post your not sufficiently developed ideas here merely to have them discussed. But I don't know what makes you feel that you, or your ideas, are /entitled/ to any response at all, much less "follow-through." To expand on this a little bit, I've been subscribed to this group for a couple of months, but there seems to be a bit more gray area between what would go to a 'python-dev' group and a 'python-user' group. Long debates about language features and abstract ideas would appeal to the former, but not the latter. Certainly I fall into the user category.. I'm pretty happy with python, and generally just adjust to it's design and features, rather than spend lots of time on whether they are 'right' or could be 'better'. /shrug Actually, python-dev is for the concrete development of Python. Releases, bugs, and occasionally design discussions for relevant features. Long debates about potential features and abstract ideas belong either here or python-ideas. -- Robert Kern "I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." -- Umberto Eco -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
Chris Rebert wrote: On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 9:03 AM, Eric Wertman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: To expand on this a little bit, I've been subscribed to this group for a couple of months, but there seems to be a bit more gray area between what would go to a 'python-dev' group and a 'python-user' group. Long debates about language features and abstract ideas would appeal to the former, but not the latter. The py-dev mailing list, and its gmane.comp.python.devel mirror, is for concrete discussion, mostly by developers, of how to develop the current and next release. The current focus in on finishing 2.6 for release. Almost nothing that has appeared here recently belongs there. It is much more common for people to post there usage questions that belong here or speculative issues that could also go to python-ideas. >> Certainly I fall into the user category.. I'm pretty happy with python, and generally just adjust to it's design and features, rather than spend lots of time on whether they are 'right' or could be 'better'. /shrug Long rehashes of decided issues, like the name of subprocess.popen, or the default of sum(), belong here better than anywhere else, if anywhere ;-). Yeah, suggestions about changing the language are much better suited to the more-specific Python-ideas or Python-3000 mailinglists than the general-purpose c.l.p The Python-3000 mailing list, and the gmane.comp.python.python-3.devel mirror, is the py-dev equivalent for python3-specific issues. tjr -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
On 2008-09-08, Chris Rebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 9:03 AM, Eric Wertman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> To expand on this a little bit, I've been subscribed to this >> group for a couple of months, but there seems to be a bit more >> gray area between what would go to a 'python-dev' group and a >> 'python-user' group. Long debates about language features and >> abstract ideas would appeal to the former, but not the latter. >> Certainly I fall into the user category.. I'm pretty happy >> with python, and generally just adjust to it's design and >> features, rather than spend lots of time on whether they are >> 'right' or could be 'better'. /shrug > > Yeah, suggestions about changing the language are much better > suited to the more-specific Python-ideas or Python-3000 > mailinglists than the general-purpose c.l.p I don't think anybody here in c.l.p minds reading suggestions for language features/changes, but often what the poster in question writes is just an incomprehensible collection of vaguely philosophical-sounding metaphores and similes reminiscent of a hoax paper submitted as a joke to a post-modern "journal" of some pretend science or other. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! Used staples are good at with SOY SAUCE! visi.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
On Sep 8, 2:04 pm, "Chris Rebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 9:03 AM, Eric Wertman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Perhaps the wrong idea of what the group is. I would have thought > >> that > >> if one had a sufficiently developed idea and wanted to have it / > >> formally/ > >> rejected, rather than merely sniped at, then writting a PEP would be > >> more > >> apposite than posting to c.l.py. > > >> It's fine to post your not sufficiently developed ideas here merely > >> to > >> have them discussed. But I don't know what makes you feel that you, > >> or > >> your ideas, are /entitled/ to any response at all, much less > >> "follow-through." > > > To expand on this a little bit, I've been subscribed to this group > > for a couple of months, but there seems to be a bit more gray area > > between what would go to a 'python-dev' group and a 'python-user' > > group. Long debates about language features and abstract ideas would > > appeal to the former, but not the latter. Certainly I fall into the > > user category.. I'm pretty happy with python, and generally just > > adjust to it's design and features, rather than spend lots of time on > > whether they are 'right' or could be 'better'. /shrug > > Yeah, suggestions about changing the language are much better suited > to the more-specific Python-ideas or Python-3000 mailinglists than the > general-purpose c.l.p > - Chris > > > -- > >http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list > > -- > Follow the path of the Iguana...http://rebertia.com Some of the core devs from Python-Ideas have suggested that I get some of my ideas started on c.l.py. Also, I'm looking for people to connect with and interact with about Python and none of the core devs have time, which makes c.l.py the place. I'm starting to get discouraged, as though there's no one really interested in this cool thing I'm thinking of. Or did I just not describe it well? It would be safe to assume that people read my post, understood it, and weren't interested, except that a few replies came, and then it was dropped without any obvious explanation. Further, and I'm sad to report this, I found tempers really high strung on the Ideas list, so c.l.py may have more potential anyway, with more young and flexible users. Not to say that the core devs are old or brittle or anything, just that their time is already devoted and they don't have time for people like me. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
On Sep 8, 11:23 am, "Dan Upton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 10:59 PM, castironpi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sep 7, 7:34 pm, MRAB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Sep 7, 11:28 pm, "Eric Wertman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> > +1 Bot > > >> I think it's like duck typing: it doesn't matter whether he's actually > >> a bot, only whether he behaves like one. > > > Do you support the bot interface and methods? > > -- > > And this is an example of why you get +1 bot. I took Eric's comment to be a joke and mine was too. I don't get the feeling yours is, no offense. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 9:03 AM, Eric Wertman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Perhaps the wrong idea of what the group is. I would have thought >> that >> if one had a sufficiently developed idea and wanted to have it / >> formally/ >> rejected, rather than merely sniped at, then writting a PEP would be >> more >> apposite than posting to c.l.py. >> >> It's fine to post your not sufficiently developed ideas here merely >> to >> have them discussed. But I don't know what makes you feel that you, >> or >> your ideas, are /entitled/ to any response at all, much less >> "follow-through." > > > To expand on this a little bit, I've been subscribed to this group > for a couple of months, but there seems to be a bit more gray area > between what would go to a 'python-dev' group and a 'python-user' > group. Long debates about language features and abstract ideas would > appeal to the former, but not the latter. Certainly I fall into the > user category.. I'm pretty happy with python, and generally just > adjust to it's design and features, rather than spend lots of time on > whether they are 'right' or could be 'better'. /shrug Yeah, suggestions about changing the language are much better suited to the more-specific Python-ideas or Python-3000 mailinglists than the general-purpose c.l.p - Chris > -- > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list > -- Follow the path of the Iguana... http://rebertia.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 10:59 PM, castironpi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sep 7, 7:34 pm, MRAB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Sep 7, 11:28 pm, "Eric Wertman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > +1 Bot >> >> I think it's like duck typing: it doesn't matter whether he's actually >> a bot, only whether he behaves like one. > > Do you support the bot interface and methods? > -- And this is an example of why you get +1 bot. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
> Perhaps the wrong idea of what the group is. I would have thought > that > if one had a sufficiently developed idea and wanted to have it / > formally/ > rejected, rather than merely sniped at, then writting a PEP would be > more > apposite than posting to c.l.py. > > It's fine to post your not sufficiently developed ideas here merely > to > have them discussed. But I don't know what makes you feel that you, > or > your ideas, are /entitled/ to any response at all, much less > "follow-through." To expand on this a little bit, I've been subscribed to this group for a couple of months, but there seems to be a bit more gray area between what would go to a 'python-dev' group and a 'python-user' group. Long debates about language features and abstract ideas would appeal to the former, but not the latter. Certainly I fall into the user category.. I'm pretty happy with python, and generally just adjust to it's design and features, rather than spend lots of time on whether they are 'right' or could be 'better'. /shrug -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
On Sep 8, 7:00 am, castironpi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am concerned by the lack of follow-through on some responses to > recent ideas I have described. Do I merely have a wrong understanding > of group policy? [snip] Perhaps the wrong idea of what the group is. I would have thought that if one had a sufficiently developed idea and wanted to have it / formally/ rejected, rather than merely sniped at, then writting a PEP would be more apposite than posting to c.l.py. It's fine to post your not sufficiently developed ideas here merely to have them discussed. But I don't know what makes you feel that you, or your ideas, are /entitled/ to any response at all, much less "follow-through." -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
On Sep 7, 7:34 pm, MRAB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sep 7, 11:28 pm, "Eric Wertman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > +1 Bot > > I think it's like duck typing: it doesn't matter whether he's actually > a bot, only whether he behaves like one. Do you support the bot interface and methods? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
Paul Boddie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 7 Sep, 23:00, castironpi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I am concerned by the lack of follow-through on some responses to > > recent ideas I have described. Do I merely have a wrong > > understanding of group policy? > > I think some people have taken exception to your contributions > previously, which I believe exhibits a certain degree of > shortsightedness on their part […] For my part, I find those posts a mammoth waste of my time, since they're shrouded in language so difficult to parse that I can't see what they're supposed to be saying in a reasonable amount of time. So, I consider it more valuable to never see those posts; if someone else can find a gem of wisdom in any of them that's significantly valuable, presumably I'll find out by some other means than attempting to read those posts myself. This is not intended as any kind of offense to the author, nor to anyone not fluent in written English; it's merely a choice I make as to how I will spend my time. -- \ “No wonder I'm all confused; one of my parents was a woman, the | `\ other was a man.” —Ashleigh Brilliant | _o__) | Ben Finney -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
On Sep 7, 11:28 pm, "Eric Wertman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > +1 Bot I think it's like duck typing: it doesn't matter whether he's actually a bot, only whether he behaves like one. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
On 7 Sep, 23:00, castironpi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am concerned by the lack of follow-through on some responses to > recent ideas I have described. Do I merely have a wrong understanding > of group policy? I think some people have taken exception to your contributions previously, which I believe exhibits a certain degree of shortsightedness on their part, considering for example the recent thread which brought up just-in-time compilation techniques where there were pretty valid reasons for keeping the thread going. Certainly, it wasn't as if the level of discussion was stuck at basic contradiction or mudslinging, and even if reading the different papers on the topic might help an inquirer on the matter, there's certainly nothing wrong with seeking guidance over which papers might be the best ones, nor with seeking some kind of context for that work within the realm of Python implementations, especially given the recent glut of news on virtual machine improvements for other dynamic languages. > Is it a good policy (defined with respect to the > future of Python and the welfare of humans at large) if so? Is there > a serious lack of diligence, or should I merely take more initiative, > and ignore charges of 'pestering'? (Warning, moderately deep outside > social issues on table too.) I'm no expert on getting other people to embrace ideas, but here's my advice anyway. If you have an idea and can describe it coherently, please do so; this won't guarantee positive responses, but there may be people out there who feel that you're onto something. If the idea has merit - generally, the most reliable way to know involves you personally experiencing difficulties in a problem area where the idea in question promises to alleviate some of those difficulties - then by developing that idea, typically producing something that others can try out, people will know that you mean business. Alternatively, people might point you to existing work that will address the problems you're having, saving you the bother of having to write a load of code to enact that idea of yours. You can be lucky and have people chasing you down over what you've produced, but I'd argue that most of the time, for any given idea which becomes a project, you'll have a few people interested in what you've done, but the motivation for continuing will be something that will depend on yourself and your own needs. You have to accept that even if you think that people (and Python) might be well served in listening to what you have to say, that message may go unheard. Once upon a time, the BDFL and the most central core developers used to read comp.lang.python and ideas about Python's future were exchanged readily. Today, all lobbying takes place on the python-dev/ 3000/ideas mailing lists, but those lists are more conservative with regard to contributions than comp.lang.python (python-list). Perhaps as a consequence, the divide between those steering the language and those using it has grown: "producers" use the aforementioned lists, "consumers" argue with each other on the newsgroup, and it might be in the release notes that you learn about happenings that previously would have been reported more widely elsewhere. Certainly, influencing the future of Python, at least officially, is a lot more hard work than it used to be. One may decide to worry about this, along with matters like how Python will remain able to compete with other languages and platforms. I regard the future development of Python as a process which may not necessarily serve my interests, but since the community around Python is so much larger and more diverse than those following every last Python 3.0 commit, I see no need to become agitated by the direction of the language developers. Since Python is Free Software one has, after all, a lot of flexibility when deciding who to associate with and who to influence, and it is ultimately only through trying to achieve things with the technology that one's priorities (or the things one should be worrying about) emerge. For me, then, influencing Python 3.x isn't a priority since I have enough to be thinking about and working on, and I wonder if I'll ever do anything with Python 3.x anyway. So, I suppose, the message is this: follow your own interests, make contributions in the ways that make sense to you, seek contact with like-minded developers in groups which might be remote from mainstream Python development (find an appropriate, potentially specialised audience); these things will define any need you may have to influence others. Paul -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
On Sep 7, 5:45 pm, Steven D'Aprano <[EMAIL PROTECTED] cybersource.com.au> wrote: > On Mon, 08 Sep 2008 07:34:55 +1000, James Mills wrote: > > Hi, > > > This is the strangest post I've seen > > since I've joined this list (only > > recently). What the ? > > Oh don't mind castironpi, many people think he's an IRC bot with some > experimental AI features that escaped onto Usenet *grins*. If you think > that post of his was strange, you haven't seen anything yet. Many people > have kill-filed him, and never even see his posts. > > A word to castironpi: you just suggested you will pester the list to get > a response. It's behaviour like that which gets you kill-filed. If you > would spend one tenth of the effort that you spend on understand Python > on understanding human psychology, you will probably get on with others > much better and find fewer people claiming you're a bot. > > Even if you yourself don't understand how others behave and expect you to > behave, think of it as an intellectual puzzle: how can I fool the strange > hairless apes into accepting me into their herd? > > -- > Steven First, gauge their persistence tolerance. Some people are not persistent enough. I don't want to annoy you, and I want to show interest, but of course no more than I actually feel. Are my standards too low, or too high? Second, debate the reverse psychology tack. Claim I'm a bot to shake their belief? Or call them bots? Perhaps they are. Bots with cooties. Yes. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
On Mon, 08 Sep 2008 07:34:55 +1000, James Mills wrote: > Hi, > > This is the strangest post I've seen > since I've joined this list (only > recently). What the ? Oh don't mind castironpi, many people think he's an IRC bot with some experimental AI features that escaped onto Usenet *grins*. If you think that post of his was strange, you haven't seen anything yet. Many people have kill-filed him, and never even see his posts. A word to castironpi: you just suggested you will pester the list to get a response. It's behaviour like that which gets you kill-filed. If you would spend one tenth of the effort that you spend on understand Python on understanding human psychology, you will probably get on with others much better and find fewer people claiming you're a bot. Even if you yourself don't understand how others behave and expect you to behave, think of it as an intellectual puzzle: how can I fool the strange hairless apes into accepting me into their herd? -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
On Sep 8, 8:36 am, Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote: > > Yeah, castironpi sometimes doesn't make much sense. Maybe because it's a > > bot!? :-) > > if so, they sure don't make c.l.py bots like they used to, do they? > > That's correct. This one seems to have an anger management module :-) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote: Yeah, castironpi sometimes doesn't make much sense. Maybe because it's a bot!? :-) if so, they sure don't make c.l.py bots like they used to, do they? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
+1 Bot -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
On Sep 7, 5:03 pm, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 08 Sep 2008 07:34:55 +1000, James Mills wrote: > > This is the strangest post I've seen > > since I've joined this list (only > > recently). What the ? > > Yeah, castironpi sometimes doesn't make much sense. Maybe because it's a > bot!? :-) > > Ciao, > Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch No, I'm legit, and I believe my complaint is. That's all I can guarantee anyway. While I'm still not a vet on Usenet, I'm still disappointed so far. Though I should be flattered for my logic to be ever compared to an A.I.'s. Maybe the ideas are not that groundbreaking, but they still have been dropped instead of critiqued. Problem. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
On Mon, 08 Sep 2008 07:34:55 +1000, James Mills wrote: > This is the strangest post I've seen > since I've joined this list (only > recently). What the ? Yeah, castironpi sometimes doesn't make much sense. Maybe because it's a bot!? :-) Ciao, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
En Sun, 07 Sep 2008 18:00:30 -0300, castironpi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió: > I am concerned by the lack of follow-through on some responses to > recent ideas I have described. Do I merely have a wrong understanding > of group policy? Is it a good policy (defined with respect to the > future of Python and the welfare of humans at large) if so? Is there > a serious lack of diligence, or should I merely take more initiative, > and ignore charges of 'pestering'? (Warning, moderately deep outside > social issues on table too.) Maybe people just doesn't have anything to say? Last thing I remember from you, is some mmap-based tree, and I'm not interested. -- Gabriel Genellina -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lacking follow-through
Hi, This is the strangest post I've seen since I've joined this list (only recently). What the ? cheers James On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 7:00 AM, castironpi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am concerned by the lack of follow-through on some responses to > recent ideas I have described. Do I merely have a wrong understanding > of group policy? Is it a good policy (defined with respect to the > future of Python and the welfare of humans at large) if so? Is there > a serious lack of diligence, or should I merely take more initiative, > and ignore charges of 'pestering'? (Warning, moderately deep outside > social issues on table too.) > -- > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list > -- -- -- "Problems are solved by method" -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
lacking follow-through
I am concerned by the lack of follow-through on some responses to recent ideas I have described. Do I merely have a wrong understanding of group policy? Is it a good policy (defined with respect to the future of Python and the welfare of humans at large) if so? Is there a serious lack of diligence, or should I merely take more initiative, and ignore charges of 'pestering'? (Warning, moderately deep outside social issues on table too.) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
