I'm currently travelling behind the Great Firewall of China with limited Internet so I may not be able to respond promptly. I saw the thread re-developing but only managed to get a private comment through to Richard.
First, I need to apologize to Michael and the community for not yet doing what I'd committed to, to discuss this thread with Richard. The impact was Richard came upon this thread in surprise and needed to defend himself. Thank you Michael for taking the majority of discussion off-list. Richard, I'll chat with you more on this on Skype sometime over the next few weeks when I start up on your JRMPC project. My current takeaways are: * If the goal is to engage the broadest audience, Michael's experience of the impact on third-parties is important to know. * Its easy to get entrenched in an auto-defensive position, but more effective to listen to understand how to reach people more effectively. There is always something to learn from opposing view points. * Making someone wrong is not the best way to get your point across. * Its better to do things sooner rather than later (i.e. me), even when busy with other things. cheers -ben On Thu, 11 Apr 2019 at 18:33, Tim Mackinnon <tim@testit.works> wrote: > Thanks guys - I think some useful clarifications came out of this - and I > hope it doesn’t dent anyone’s enthusiasm to spreading the good word about > all useful technology and approaches. > > > On 11 Apr 2019, at 08:28, Michael Zeder <p...@michael-j-zeder.de> wrote: > > > > > > > >> How about we just move on? > > > > Thanks. I have responded in private to persons who asked for it, to not > further flood the list. > > > > To close this thread, I feel it may be necessary to say something > conciliatory: So, apology to Richard for being rude and loud. I was pushing > for reactions, and since you sought the lime light yourself, I was > particularly harsh. > > > > > >> ... everyone focuses on the merits of their respective > languages/approaches - I´m more interested seeing energy invested in the > next cool things in all languages. I´m also keen for us also finishing off > the bits we still in progress. And I hope we can constructively share ideas > ... > > > > Fully agreed. I stand by my points, public appearance of a community is > a concern. A seclusive "obscure" small niche language which makes a "silly" > picture in web searches and bashes and lashes out on big languages (for > good/bad reasons) is not appealing and does not market itself well. > > (Since a criticized again, apology again for the tone) > > > > >
