in reply to Re^6: Why Perl 6 is taking so !@#$ long
in thread Why Perl 6 is taking so !@#$ long

How about if I did take part?

How about if my (real) name appeared in the credits list? And all over the discussion forums? If, after taking a good deal of time trying to convey my concerns with the project, and supporting others when they expressed their concerns, it became obvious to all that those concerns were concidered unimportant or trivial or simply too far from where those with influence wanted to go, I backed away. And when those that did seems to share my concerns felt they had no other course but to walk away, I decided that it was a lost cause? What then? Is keeping my own council still "gutless"?

Update:

"I don't think the project will succeed but I'm not going to tell you why"

Also, I never said that. Nearly a year ago I agreed with another monk that I didn't think Parrot would succeed. And a couple of hours ago I declined to enter into technical debate about a subject I am no longer up to date on with someone whom appears to delight in knocking Perl.

Had anyone been interested back then, or if anyone was seriously interested in my opinion now--then a private msg asking for that opinion would be the right approach.

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
Lingua non convalesco, consenesco et abolesco. -- Rule 1 has a caveat! -- Who broke the cabal?
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
  • Comment on Re^7: Why Perl 6 is taking so !@#$ long

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^8: Why Perl 6 is taking so !@#$ long
by chromatic (Archbishop) on Oct 22, 2006 at 06:22 UTC
    Had anyone been interested back then, or if anyone was seriously interested in my opinion now--then a private msg asking for that opinion would be the right approach.

    Oh well then, please please deign stop teasing us arrogant idiots and tell us exactly what we're doing wrong.

[reply]
      tell us exactly what we're doing wrong.

      In your case, that's easy. Disparaging any opinion that does not coincide with your own--even before you know what that opinion is.

      Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
      Lingua non convalesco, consenesco et abolesco. -- Rule 1 has a caveat! -- Who broke the cabal?
      "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
      In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
[reply]

        No, I'm dismissing your strategy -- taking your ball and going home, and then a year later making vague assertions about the state of a project you admittedly haven't followed for a year, then backing up your claims with "I have facts, but I'm not going to present them unless you ask nicely in private."

        You can have whatever opinion you want. I just think it's really unfair to spread FUD in public and refuse to provide details -- especially in an old thread where people actually doing work on the project don't often look.

        I mean, what can anyone involved in Parrot right now possibly say to counter your claims? "No, those things you think but won't say aren't possibly true or don't matter, for these reasons I'm thinking but not saying?"

        What possible good does spreading your opinion do? There are billions of people who just don't care about Parrot, and we work on it anyway. I'm sure there are thousands of people who don't belive it'll ever work, and we work on it anyway. Then you come along and claim to have some brilliant knowledge about why, but you won't tell anyone, and that's just fairly useless.

        That's all. Flame away. I don't care.

[reply]
A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.

In Section Meditations