Excuse me, my mistake.
David Grove wrote:
> > If you have not been following this thread, then maybe that is
> > the reason for
> > the confused-sounding nature of your email.
> >
> > I would say Simon was the one "ignoring an issue and attacking a
> > person", not
> > Vijay. I think Vijay was
> > Well, I *have* been following the discussion. And to me, it looks indeed
> > like you, Simon, were indeed attacking ME on non-technical grounds.
> > Vijay just jumped in for him, like a lioness trying to protect her
> > kittens.
>
> Which he does from time to time, as do most of us, myself lik
> -Original Message-
> From: Bart Lateur [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 10:48 AM
> To: Perl 6 Language Mailing List
> Subject: Re: Social Reform
>
>
> On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 08:54:13 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
>
> >On Mon, Jun 11, 2
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 08:54:13 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
>On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 05:19:26PM -0700, Daniel S. Wilkerson wrote:
>> I would say Simon was the one "ignoring an issue and attacking a person", not
>> Vijay.
>
>You are wrong. Go back through the archives. Vijay has posted four
>messages
rect the formation of cliques among us, such an email would
be precisely on topic for the reformation of this language.
I consider this social reform of at least equal importance to the Perl
community as any new syntactic differences and changes in underlying parser
engines. I personally consider so
> If you have not been following this thread, then maybe that is
> the reason for
> the confused-sounding nature of your email.
>
> I would say Simon was the one "ignoring an issue and attacking a
> person", not
> Vijay. I think Vijay was the one pointing out that this person ("Me") was
> contrib
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 05:19:26PM -0700, Daniel S. Wilkerson wrote:
> I would say Simon was the one "ignoring an issue and attacking a person", not
> Vijay.
You are wrong. Go back through the archives. Vijay has posted four
messages: two of which are critical of Perl, two of which are pretty
he
sion with... and quiet resumes with the issues still in place.
> This was a huge problem in the Perl 5 Porters, and it has recently begun
> coming into the Perl 6 groups. This is why I've been distancing myself from
> this group, including your previous call to arms.
>
> We will a
Porters, and it has recently begun
coming into the Perl 6 groups. This is why I've been distancing myself from
this group, including your previous call to arms.
We will achieve social reform only by refusing to conduct ourselves in this
manner, and without social reform, Perl 6 may as well not
