I guss Erik doesn't wish to heal any wounds. I've been trying really
hard to mend this situation. As I try harder to mend it, Erik works
harder to break it again. He's established yet another mail filter, so
I'm forced to post this here, in comp.lang.lisp. There's no other way
for me to reach Erik right now.
---------------------------- CUT HERE --------------------------------
Firstly, please read this _very_ slowly, with slow breaths,
and please try to remain calm. The tone of your previous reply
suggests that you're "redmisting". I'm _not_ flaming you,
nor am I stupid. I _may_ be ignorant, but ignornance can be
cured with little education, which is all I'm asking for.
Only a _little_ education, mind you.
If you give me a chance, I may prove to you that I _do_ have
something to say, something that you may find interesting.
However, from the intensely hostile tome of all your replies,
I'm not sure that you're bothering. If I'm mistaken, then
it's because your posts appear to be flames. If not, then
I'm more confused than ever. Can you please help?
I can appreciate how hard this is. I also find this hard.
Your histility makes me feel very hostile in return, but
I'm attempting to control my feelings, so that we may
communicate. We can't possibly do that if we only flame
each other. Redmist kills _all_ communication.
> it's important for you to realize that I didn't know what you knew.
that
> you failed to be able to call me was grounds to believe you couldn't
figure
> out which number to call or how to operate a telephone. this applies
to
> much of your writing, actually.
IMHO that's why we need to talk. This medium has a very low
bandwidth, while spoken words convey so much more, word by word.
> your ability to think has nothing to do with the medium.
Communication is a two way street. You appear to be flaming,
which does _not_ help anyone. Not even you. You don't have to
bit someone's head off to disagree with them. I can disagree
with you on some things and yet still respect you. This is
because I agree with you on most other things.
> | So, let's talk.
>
> NO FUCKING WAY! _*YOU*_ HAVE A JOB TO DO, FIRST. IF _*YOU*_ START
SHOWING
> EVIDENCE OF BEING WORTH TALKING TO, I WILL TALK WITH YOU, BUT YOU
DON'T,
> AND YOU HAVEN'T GIVEN MY ANY _REASON_ TO WANT TO TALK TO YOU. _*YOU*_
WORK
> ON THAT. WHEN YOU _DESERVE_ IT, WE CAN TALK.
So I should just send email and not know if you'll respond?
What kind of evidence are you looking for? So far, all I can
see are flames. They only tell me how pissed off you are.
You react the same way to everything I say...
Could you not give me a little more to work with? I'm showing
that I'm willing to talk. You, however, seem to be saying that
no matter what I say, you won't listen. I hope that this is
just a misunderstanding, but you give me so little to work with,
is it any suprise that we're not communicating?
It's almost as if you've already decided that I'll _never_ have
anything to say that you'd be prepared to listen to. I've seen
you do this with other people, and this kind of hostility doesn't
enamour people to either you (they've told me so, by email),
or Lisp (as you've often done it when defending Lisp against
C++ programmers.
Larry Wall does this, too. It's an assumptiong that ignorance
is as bad as - or the same as - stupity. I disagee with this.
Ignornance can be cured with education, which is all I'm asking
for, while stupity cannot. I think that you have a lot of wisdom.
The evidence for this is in the best of your posts. However,
as soon as someone fails to immediately understand you and
agree 100%, you give your "go away, you're stupid" flame.
That sounds a lot like the following quote, only shorter:
"No, I'm not going to explain it. If you can't figure it out,
you didn't want to know anyway..." Larry Wall
I know that you can do better than this. I'm not even asking
you to try for my sake.
Anyway, thanks for replying.
---------------------------- CUT HERE --------------------------------
The above message probably didn't get thru to Erik, by email. He might
not even read it here. I'd just like to _try_, even if Erik won't give
me a chance. But then, he never did.
Erik heavily flamed me for munging my email address. He's not the
first to do so, but he's only the second person. It seems that neither
of them accept this practice, nor even acknowledge that it is widely
practiced. I admit that I forgot to unmunge it, but that's due to
human fallibility - a weakness that apparently Erik doesn't share.
I apologised, and he flamed me some more.
After he applied the first email block, I had to switch to an online
service that doesn't provide me with an SMTP service, so I had to use
some rather archaic software to access a command line mailer. Maybe
this also pissed him off? He didn't say.
IMHO this hostility to anyone with a reading lower on their clue meter
isn't helping Lisp. Ignorance can be cured with little education.
However, if you can only tell people, "you're stupid, go away", then
of course they _will_ go away - with a bad impression of Lispers.
This is the message that I'm getting from Erik, in spite of having
used Lisp for more than 10 years. I've even implemented it a few
times. If that counts as being clueless, then I'm probably not the
only Lisper who'll get this treatment. In fact, I'm sure I'm not.
Most of us can see things differently and still respect each other.
--
<URL:http://www.wildcard.demon.co.uk/> You can never browse enough
Please note: my email address is gubbish
will write lisp code for food
* Martin Rodgers
| I guss Erik doesn't wish to heal any wounds.
you _are_ the wound. if you go away, the wound will be healed. I really
want the wound to heal: JUST GET THE HELL OUT OF MY FACE!
and whoever gave you permission to quote from private communication?
please go die, Martin Rogders. at least the maggots will like you.
#\Erik
--
404 You're better off without that file. Trust me.
Erik Naggum (······@naggum.no) wrote:
: you _are_ the wound. ...
Wow! What a breathtaking display of emotional restraint and tact.
Comp.lang.lisp.moderated, anyone?
--
Christopher Oliver, digital washrag
Traverse Communications
(reverse ·············@revilo")
················@fritz.co.traverse.com (Christopher Oliver) writes:
> Comp.lang.lisp.moderated, anyone?
I think comp.lang.lisp.no-martin-rodgers-here-please would suffice.
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
·····@ifi.uio.no * Lars Ingebrigtsen
ET wheezed these wise words:
> Would Erik Naggum and Martin Rodgers please both pretend that the
> other doesn't exist? I'd like to discuss Lisp.
Done.
--
<URL:http://www.wildcard.demon.co.uk/> You can never browse enough
Please note: my email address is gubbish
ignorance is better than stupidity
you can cure ignorance