Dearest comp.lang.lisp readers,
I want to apologize for so many long messages on comp.lang.lisp,
and for the inadequacy of some of my too prompt reactions.
I spent a lot of time trying to present detailed, consistent
and fair arguments, but I fear I have a bit neglected to ensure
that my postings be as respectful of others as they should.
Now, at a time when people on this newsgroup once again wondered about
"Barriers to Lisp acceptance", I felt compelled to explain my analysis.
Indeed I'm convinced it explains the problem and proposes solutions,
and I believe it is being ignored without proper consideration.
I did not want to convince everyone that mine is necessarily the One True (tm)
only possible point of view. Rather, I wanted to show that the classical
proprietary software model was not the One True point of view either,
and that free software theory could offer a consistent opposing theory,
that I wished was understood better. Even when it is not agreed to,
I wish it was acknowledged as a possible consistent point of view,
and critiqued for what it actually said, rather than on the grounds
of the actual or supposed religious tenets of its proponents and opponents.
In the articles available on my page [1] (mostly in french, some in english),
I've tried to describe a consistent economic theory for free information.
Since I greatly value the opinion of people whose comp.lang.lisp postings
I read, I invite those of you who are interested in discussing
similar theories to read these articles and counter their arguments
on more appropriate lists (such as the cybernethics mailing list [2]).
I apologize for driving the discussion more and more off-topic,
but I think it was inevitable that free software theory be discussed
when considering the possible strategies of LISP vendors.
I think I've already said all I had to say, so now I will shut up.
[1] http://www.tunes.org/~fare/articles/
[2] http://www2.tunes.org/cgi-bin/wilma/cybernethics/
Best regards,
[ "Far�" | VN: Уng-V� B�n | Join the TUNES project! http://www.tunes.org/ ]
[ FR: Fran�ois-Ren� Rideau | TUNES is a Useful, Nevertheless Expedient System ]
[ Reflection&Cybernethics | Project for a Free Reflective Computing System ]
A fruitful discussion is a negociation, out of which emerges meaning. Classic
works are standards, and politeness is a protocol, to ease such negociation.
With a reasonably expressive language, neither is strictly needed,
but both sure do help, and they are where the general progress happens.