On 8/8/07, James Edward Gray II <james / grayproductions.net> wrote:
> On Aug 8, 2007, at 9:52 AM, Trans wrote:
>
> > I think that's what you technical adepts have never grasped. The
> > problem isn't technical, it's haptic.
>
> Your prose got too flowery for me here.  I looked up haptic, as I
> suspect you intended, and I still have no clue what you said.
>
> > But we've been threw this -- since the 2nd overhaul of the RCR
> > processes, let alone the third. For whatever reason, my critiques
> > clearly arn't worth the electrons they're transmitted-by.
>
> So your strategy has been to lob regular change-the-language requests
> at Ruby Talk in protest?  How often has that resulted in success,
> just out of curiosity?

This is an attitude I cannot understand?
I have to recognize that valuable members like Gregory, David and
yourself have probably a point when they agree, out of pure
experience(1), but here I feel that I see things completely different.

For me this is a discussion beyond lobbying, and I feel it is rich,
and I feel sad that
you folks point a finger and cry RCR :)
This is strange but it is the best way I can describe this, hmm I
promised I would not speak up on this anymore, but I am too intrigued,
so you can criticize my netiquette for sure :(
Robert


(1) Experience also tells me that Tom's ideas are worth thinking about
them, some I found strange or wrong, but not many....
-- 
[...] as simple as possible, but no simpler.
-- Attributed to Albert Einstein