Wayne E. Seguin wrote:
> 
> On Jul 10, 2007, at 11:24 , pat eyler wrote:
>> Even if you don't believe in a/the g/God, naming a software project in a
>> way that's nearly certain to offend some class of potential users is
>> probably
>> a bad idea.  It reduces the potential number of users/contributors, and
>> may retard the spread of the software as well.
> 
> Or seriously hasten the spread via publicity over the name.
> 
>> The Ruby community has long held that names are important for methods
>> -- they should be descriptive and help the programmer.  We've never done
>> a very good job with names for projects/libraries (at least in my
>> opinion),
>> maybe it's time for us all to spend a little more time and effort in that
>> direction.
> 
> This particular project is very aptly named as it is designed to "play
> god" with the system.

I completely agree.  I think this whole argument over the name is quite
stupid -- It's just a name for a freakin' piece of software, folks; get
over it; it's funny.

Of course, this is coming from the guy who's friends nicknamed him
"TechGod" at church, and when the old ladies had a come apart they
changed it to "TekWiz" -- of course a few of them still had problem with
that seeing as how "Wiz" means "Wizard" and that involves witchcraft.

All Hail Harry!!

--
  Travis Warlick

  "Programming in Java is like dealing with your mom --
   it's kind, forgiving, and gently chastising.
   Programming in C++ is like dealing with a disgruntled
   girlfriend -- it's cold, unforgiving, and doesn't tell
   you what you've done wrong."