The following refers to events that have occurred in this newsgroup
mainly in 2002, with some aftermath in 2003. When I have entered this
newsgroup in order to participate in public discussions about Lisp and
related topics in 2002, I have made the mistake to allow myself to be
dragged into off-topic discussions of a very unhealthy nature. These
discussions involved some strong exchange of blows between Erik Naggum
and myself. During those discussions and later on, I have been misled to
attack him personally on various occasions although it would have been
wiser to stay calm and objective. I regret to have acted like that, and
I would like to apologize for these actions of mine in the past,
especially to Erik Naggum, but also to other people who have felt
strongly distracted by these unproductive postings. I hope it will be
possible for all those concerned to regard this as an offer to settle
things.
Background information: The reason why this apology comes very late is
that I have hoped that this issue could be dealt with in the background
at some stage, via email or some other form of private communication.
However, now that I have announced the 1st European Lisp and Scheme
Workshop, that is co-organized by several people including myself, Erik
Naggum has contacted me and expressed an insistence on an apology in the
same forum in which the attacks have occurred. I understand that Erik
Naggum is a very important contributor to the Lisp community and that
many people would like to see him participate in a Lisp workshop,
especially one that is going to take place in Oslo - apparently his
hometown and one of the European cities with a very strong Lisp
community. Since I believe that it is more important that this workshop
serves the whole community rather than anyone's ego, I have decided to
make this public apology.
Pascal
--
Pascal Costanza University of Bonn
···············@web.de Institute of Computer Science III
http://www.pascalcostanza.de R�merstr. 164, D-53117 Bonn (Germany)
Rajappa Iyer wrote:
> Pascal Costanza <········@web.de> writes:
>
>>communication. However, now that I have announced the 1st European
>>Lisp and Scheme Workshop, that is co-organized by several people
>>including myself, Erik Naggum has contacted me and expressed an
>>insistence on an apology in the same forum in which the attacks have
>>occurred.
>
> What a turd.
In the past, I have chosen to place my attacks in this forum, so it's
understandable that he only accepts an apology in the same forum now.
Otherwise it wouldn't reach the same audience. The mistakes I have
referred to were mine, not his and not anybody else's.
It would be helpful if you wouldn't use my posting as an opportunity to
attack him again. It's not ok to attack someone just because you don't
like them. If you choose to objectively criticize the contents of his
postings, that's a different thing, but this apology does not contain
any statements by him.
>>I understand that Erik Naggum is a very important
>>contributor to the Lisp community
>
> So what?
There's a difference between public and private issues. The fact that I
don't like a person doesn't give me the right to attack him out of the blue.
Pascal
Rajappa Iyer <···@panix.com> writes:
> In the past few months, comp.lang.lisp has been far more pleasant
> and useful without either Naggum's rants and the sycophantic rush to
> defend his obnoxious behavior.
If google or my memory are anything to go by, you didn't use it a lot.
> The last person to complain about unprovoked attacks should be Erik
> Naggum.
How exactly would you call what you are doing right now?
Seek help,
--
Nils G�sche
"Don't ask for whom the <CTRL-G> tolls."
PGP key ID 0x0655CFA0
Artie Gold <·········@austin.rr.com> writes:
> Nils G�sche wrote:
>> Rajappa Iyer <···@panix.com> writes:
>>
>>>Sycophant #1.
>> Troll #3124352736.
>
> Oh dear. Now we're really in trouble. Apparently non-trolls are in the
> minority. ;-(
>
Oh no. That's quite the normal state of affairs.
Rajappa Iyer <···@panix.com> writes:
> Excuse me, but you made a public apology and I can comment on both the
> apology and the pathetic small-mindedness of Naggum that demands such
> a salve to his bruised ego. In the past few months, comp.lang.lisp
> has been far more pleasant and useful without either Naggum's rants
> and the sycophantic rush to defend his obnoxious behavior.
Because you've been silent as a result?
--
Rahul Jain
·····@nyct.net
Professional Software Developer, Amateur Quantum Mechanicist
Rajappa Iyer wrote:
> Excuse me, but you made a public apology and I can comment on both the
> apology and ...
That's how I felt at first, and from what you write I think we agree at
least in part, but I saw in this a subtle twist that stayed my pen: this
was a private transaction requiring a public act. Whether the coin is
accepted will again be a private choice. We just happen to be the
unfortunate witnesses. We can protest /that/, but only a public act
would be accepted, so here we are again.
In the end it comes down to this: Pascal hopefully has earned some
credit here for his considerable service to the cause, so those who take
issue with this transaction might just let it slide.
kenny
--
http://tilton-technology.com
Why Lisp? http://alu.cliki.net/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
Your Project Here! http://alu.cliki.net/Industry%20Application
In article <···················@twister.nyc.rr.com>, Kenny Tilton
<·······@nyc.rr.com> wrote:
> Rajappa Iyer wrote:
>
> > Excuse me, but you made a public apology and I can comment on both the
> > apology and ...
>
> That's how I felt at first, and from what you write I think we agree at
> least in part, but I saw in this a subtle twist that stayed my pen: this
> was a private transaction requiring a public act. Whether the coin is
> accepted will again be a private choice. We just happen to be the
> unfortunate witnesses. We can protest /that/, but only a public act
> would be accepted, so here we are again.
>
> In the end it comes down to this: Pascal hopefully has earned some
> credit here for his considerable service to the cause, so those who take
> issue with this transaction might just let it slide.
Well said. For what it's worth I second Kenny.
E.
Rajappa Iyer wrote:
> Excuse me, but you made a public apology and I can comment on both the
> apology and [...]
I am sorry that this public apology was necessary. I would have
preferred a different sequence of events, and especially have hoped that
the issues could have been resolved later in a more appropriate setting.
However, the conflict between me and Erik has started to seriously
affect more important goals, so I have decided to pull the emergency
brake now.
I think it's important to bear in mind that the Lisp community is not
actually lacking fragmentation. It is a fact that Erik is a respected
person in this community, as can be inferred from many postings in this
group that pay tribute to him. It's impossible to ignore this. The fact
that I have misused this forum to attack Erik personally has contributed
to the fragmentation of the community, and not helped it to improve.
I won't comment on each and every response in the current thread in
detail, because this would actually be off topic, as the whole issue was
from the very beginning. I can serve the community much better in
different ways. However, I would like to inform you that your responses
to my apology are counterproductive, to say the least, as a hint that
you might want to take into consideration before posting further
comments in this thread.
Pascal
Pascal Costanza <········@web.de> writes:
> I won't comment on each and every response in the current thread in
> detail, because this would actually be off topic, as the whole issue
> was from the very beginning.
Shall we speak of Lisp, then?
ObLisp: My very hackish C++ -> lisp compiler digested an entire
(preprocessed) file today and spit out something superficially
plausible.
--
~jrm
Joe Marshall <·············@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<············@comcast.net>...
> Kudos to Pascal Costanza for putting the community before pride!
My sentiments as well.
········@myrealbox.com (Nepheles) writes:
> Joe Marshall <·············@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<············@comcast.net>...
>> Kudos to Pascal Costanza for putting the community before pride!
>
> My sentiments as well.
And mine, too.
On Mon, 01 Mar 2004 16:30:04 +0100, Pascal Costanza <········@web.de> wrote:
Pathetic. Were you allowed to write this 'apology' by yourself or did he
instruct you exactly what you had to say? Can't believe it...
>The following refers to events that have occurred in this newsgroup
>mainly in 2002, with some aftermath in 2003. When I have entered this
>newsgroup in order to participate in public discussions about Lisp and
>related topics in 2002, I have made the mistake to allow myself to be
>dragged into off-topic discussions of a very unhealthy nature. These
>discussions involved some strong exchange of blows between Erik Naggum
>and myself. During those discussions and later on, I have been misled to
>attack him personally on various occasions although it would have been
>wiser to stay calm and objective. I regret to have acted like that, and
>I would like to apologize for these actions of mine in the past,
>especially to Erik Naggum, but also to other people who have felt
>strongly distracted by these unproductive postings. I hope it will be
>possible for all those concerned to regard this as an offer to settle
>things.
>
>Background information: The reason why this apology comes very late is
>that I have hoped that this issue could be dealt with in the background
>at some stage, via email or some other form of private communication.
>However, now that I have announced the 1st European Lisp and Scheme
>Workshop, that is co-organized by several people including myself, Erik
>Naggum has contacted me and expressed an insistence on an apology in the
>same forum in which the attacks have occurred. I understand that Erik
>Naggum is a very important contributor to the Lisp community and that
>many people would like to see him participate in a Lisp workshop,
>especially one that is going to take place in Oslo - apparently his
>hometown and one of the European cities with a very strong Lisp
>community. Since I believe that it is more important that this workshop
>serves the whole community rather than anyone's ego, I have decided to
>make this public apology.
>
>
>Pascal
frr wrote:
> Were you allowed to write this 'apology' by yourself or did he
> instruct you exactly what you had to say?
No, these were my own words.
Pascal
--
Pascal Costanza University of Bonn
···············@web.de Institute of Computer Science III
http://www.pascalcostanza.de R�merstr. 164, D-53117 Bonn (Germany)
I will try to get in contact with Ekri.
However he dosn't even have a public phone number.
I have to trace him by his relatives.
John
On Mon, 01 Mar 2004 16:30:04 +0100, Pascal Costanza <········@web.de>
wrote:
> The following refers to events that have occurred in this newsgroup
> mainly in 2002, with some aftermath in 2003. When I have entered this
> newsgroup in order to participate in public discussions about Lisp and
> related topics in 2002, I have made the mistake to allow myself to be
> dragged into off-topic discussions of a very unhealthy nature. These
> discussions involved some strong exchange of blows between Erik Naggum
> and myself. During those discussions and later on, I have been misled to
> attack him personally on various occasions although it would have been
> wiser to stay calm and objective. I regret to have acted like that, and
> I would like to apologize for these actions of mine in the past,
> especially to Erik Naggum, but also to other people who have felt
> strongly distracted by these unproductive postings. I hope it will be
> possible for all those concerned to regard this as an offer to settle
> things.
>
> Background information: The reason why this apology comes very late is
> that I have hoped that this issue could be dealt with in the background
> at some stage, via email or some other form of private communication.
> However, now that I have announced the 1st European Lisp and Scheme
> Workshop, that is co-organized by several people including myself, Erik
> Naggum has contacted me and expressed an insistence on an apology in the
> same forum in which the attacks have occurred. I understand that Erik
> Naggum is a very important contributor to the Lisp community and that
> many people would like to see him participate in a Lisp workshop,
> especially one that is going to take place in Oslo - apparently his
> hometown and one of the European cities with a very strong Lisp
> community. Since I believe that it is more important that this workshop
> serves the whole community rather than anyone's ego, I have decided to
> make this public apology.
>
>
> Pascal
>
--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 16:00:07 +0100, John Thingstad
<··············@chello.no> wrote:
> I will try to get in contact with Ekri.
Erik
> However he dosn't even have a public phone number.
> I have to trace him by his relatives.
>
> John
>
> On Mon, 01 Mar 2004 16:30:04 +0100, Pascal Costanza <········@web.de>
> wrote:
>
>> The following refers to events that have occurred in this newsgroup
>> mainly in 2002, with some aftermath in 2003. When I have entered this
>> newsgroup in order to participate in public discussions about Lisp and
>> related topics in 2002, I have made the mistake to allow myself to be
>> dragged into off-topic discussions of a very unhealthy nature. These
>> discussions involved some strong exchange of blows between Erik Naggum
>> and myself. During those discussions and later on, I have been misled
>> to attack him personally on various occasions although it would have
>> been wiser to stay calm and objective. I regret to have acted like
>> that, and I would like to apologize for these actions of mine in the
>> past, especially to Erik Naggum, but also to other people who have felt
>> strongly distracted by these unproductive postings. I hope it will be
>> possible for all those concerned to regard this as an offer to settle
>> things.
>>
>> Background information: The reason why this apology comes very late is
>> that I have hoped that this issue could be dealt with in the background
>> at some stage, via email or some other form of private communication.
>> However, now that I have announced the 1st European Lisp and Scheme
>> Workshop, that is co-organized by several people including myself, Erik
>> Naggum has contacted me and expressed an insistence on an apology in
>> the same forum in which the attacks have occurred. I understand that
>> Erik Naggum is a very important contributor to the Lisp community and
>> that many people would like to see him participate in a Lisp workshop,
>> especially one that is going to take place in Oslo - apparently his
>> hometown and one of the European cities with a very strong Lisp
>> community. Since I believe that it is more important that this workshop
>> serves the whole community rather than anyone's ego, I have decided to
>> make this public apology.
>>
>>
>> Pascal
>>
>
>
>
--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Pascal Costanza wrote:
> The following refers to events that have occurred in this newsgroup
> mainly in 2002, with some aftermath in 2003. When I have entered this
> newsgroup in order to participate in public discussions about Lisp and
> related topics in 2002, I have made the mistake to allow myself to be
> dragged into off-topic discussions of a very unhealthy nature. These
> discussions involved some strong exchange of blows between Erik Naggum
> and myself. During those discussions and later on, I have been misled to
> attack him personally on various occasions although it would have been
> wiser to stay calm and objective.
How were you misled to attack him? Who misled you?
Personally I do not read this as an apology to Erik. We get these
kind of apologies from our politicians all the time. "Sorry that you
got upset over what I said (read, not sorry for what I said)".
Wade
Wade Humeniuk wrote:
> Pascal Costanza wrote:
>
>> The following refers to events that have occurred in this newsgroup
>> mainly in 2002, with some aftermath in 2003. When I have entered this
>> newsgroup in order to participate in public discussions about Lisp and
>> related topics in 2002, I have made the mistake to allow myself to be
>> dragged into off-topic discussions of a very unhealthy nature. These
>> discussions involved some strong exchange of blows between Erik Naggum
>> and myself. During those discussions and later on, I have been misled
>> to attack him personally on various occasions although it would have
>> been wiser to stay calm and objective.
>
> How were you misled to attack him? Who misled you?
Noone. I did this myself. Sorry for the bad wording. Please consider
that I am not a native speaker. (It is a common error of Germans to
overuse passive sentence structures in English because it is quite
natural to do so in the German language. The German idiom I had in mind
was: "Ich habe mich dazu verleiten lassen...".)
Pascal
Pascal Costanza <········@web.de> wrote in message news:<············@newsreader2.netcologne.de>...
> Noone. I did this myself. Sorry for the bad wording. Please consider
> that I am not a native speaker. (It is a common error of Germans to
> overuse passive sentence structures in English because it is quite
> natural to do so in the German language. The German idiom I had in mind
> was: "Ich habe mich dazu verleiten lassen...".)
What was the Happy Gilmore apology? "I'm wrong, you're right. I'm
stupid, you're smart. I'm ugly, you're handsome."
But seriously, this points out how toxic an environment Usenet is. I
liked Erik's posts because his "faults" were second-order. When I
looked at really old usenet posts, the kook factor was high and they
were also really informative. They questioned foundations, which is
already an antisocial act. Today's trolls are just the saddest shadow
of that.
Maybe when I went through the usenet wayback machine, I filtered out
all the useless posts because I explicitly searched for interesting
stuff. So I could be biased. But just look at things like Gabriel's
intro to his lisp benchmarking book. He talked about his high respect
for those who were born stupid and ugly, for the extra hard work of
their contributions. I don't know what the '80s was like, but that
sounds like some pretty extreme stuff there. People said such things!
Great book though. And his _Patterns of Software_, that part at the
end -- could Anne Rice write something more depressing? But it was
still one bold-ass book. You certainly never see that in the back of
today's Beck/Cunnigham/Ward/Gamma books.
All these guys, Richard, Erik, Kent... they're like a dying breed of
hardcore people.
Pascal Costanza wrote:
>>> ... I have been
>>> misled to attack him personally on various occasions although it
>>> would have been wiser to stay calm and objective.
>>
>>
>> How were you misled to attack him? Who misled you?
>
>
> Noone. I did this myself. Sorry for the bad wording. Please consider
> that I am not a native speaker. (It is a common error of Germans to
> overuse passive sentence structures in English because it is quite
> natural to do so in the German language. The German idiom I had in mind
> was: "Ich habe mich dazu verleiten lassen...".)
I wager you were thinking of "misguided", where the "guide" is indeed
the guided: "please forgive my misguided attempt at humor".
kenny
--
http://tilton-technology.com
Why Lisp? http://alu.cliki.net/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
Your Project Here! http://alu.cliki.net/Industry%20Application
Pascal Costanza <········@web.de> writes:
> Wade Humeniuk wrote:
>
> > How were you misled to attack him? Who misled you?
>
> Noone. I did this myself. Sorry for the bad wording. Please consider
> that I am not a native speaker. (It is a common error of Germans to
> overuse passive sentence structures in English because it is quite
> natural to do so in the German language. The German idiom I had in
> mind was: "Ich habe mich dazu verleiten lassen...".)
Actually, I think the wording "Ich habe mich dazu verleiten lassen..."
is just as passive in German as the English wording, and as such
evokes the impression that somebody else somehow forced you to do what
you did. However, this way of speaking is indeed much more common in
German, as far as I can tell. For instance, there are many Germans
who almost never use the word "I". They say "man", instead, a German
word that is hard to translate to English, usually either rendered as
"one" or more commonly "you". When these people say "Man hat ja
wirklich keine Lust, das jedesmal zu wiederholen", literally, "One
(you) really doesn't (don't) want to repeat this every time" or so,
what they really mean is "/I/ do not want to repeat this every time."
The percentage of Germans who'd choose the general, passive version is
much higher than that of the English speaking population. I don't
quite know, why. Perhaps this is because the concept of individualism
has never really caught on here, or maybe it is just some sort of
linguistic coincidence.
Regards,
--
Nils G�sche
"Don't ask for whom the <CTRL-G> tolls."
PGP key ID #xEEFBA4AF
Nils G�sche escreveu:
[snipped]
> The percentage of Germans who'd choose the general, passive version
> is much higher than that of the English speaking population. I don't
> quite know, why. Perhaps this is because the concept of
> individualism has never really caught on here, or maybe it is just
> some sort of linguistic coincidence.
>
A lot of linguists say that Language shapes thinking and vice versa. So
probably is a sort of feedback mechanism.
--
Cesar Rabak
Cesar Rabak wrote:
[snip]
> A lot of linguists say that Language shapes thinking and vice versa.
I don't think that's true nowadays.
I think that most linguists now consider that although any two languages
may differ in vocabulary size, and individual terms, the concepts
expressible in each are equivalent.
There used to be an idea that thinkable concepts differed between
languages, IIRC one linguist claimed that the native american language
Hopi had no concept of time. This claim turned out to be nonsense, and
made without the linguist actually meeting any native or fluent Hopi
speakers, however these ideas persisted for some time.
Steven Pinker's 'The Language Instinct' has a good account of this.
I do think your statement is true when it comes to computer languages.
cheers,
Alex
In article <············@news-reader1.wanadoo.fr>,
Alex McGuire <····@alexmcguire.com> wrote:
> Cesar Rabak wrote:
> [snip]
> > A lot of linguists say that Language shapes thinking and vice versa.
>
> I don't think that's true nowadays.
IMHO, the opinion of linguists on this matter is less
relevant than that of linguistic anthropologists (like
Whorf) and cognitive psychologists (such as Pinker).
> I think that most linguists now consider that although any two languages
> may differ in vocabulary size, and individual terms, the concepts
> expressible in each are equivalent.
The "linguistic relativity" hypothesis -- that a language
structures the thoughts of its speakers, with different
languages enforcing different structurings -- has gone in
and out of fashion over the past century. It's never
been dominant, at least within cognitive psychology. My
sense is that after a dormant period in the 1950s, 1960s,
and 1970s following the negative results of Brownn,
Lenneberg, Berlin, Kay, and Heider/Rosch, it's been on
the upswing. There have been recent supporting monographs
by Lucy; edited collections by Gumperz and by Gentner;
and a sprinkling of journal articles in places like
_Cognitive Psychology_, _Cognition_, and _Science_.
> There used to be an idea that thinkable concepts differed between
> languages, IIRC one linguist claimed that the native american language
> Hopi had no concept of time. This claim turned out to be nonsense, and
> made without the linguist actually meeting any native or fluent Hopi
> speakers, however these ideas persisted for some time.
Whorf wrote an article back in the 1940s arguing that
the Hopi notion of time was inherently periodic, not
linear. He is often criticized for his fieldwork because
(1) he was not an anthropological linguist by training,
but rather held a chemical engineering degree from MIT
(!) and worked as an insurance executive and (2) he only
spent 6 months living with the Hopi.
> Steven Pinker's 'The Language Instinct' has a good account of this.
Pinker is knowledgable but keep in mind he represents
just one side of a debate with good arguments and
evidence on both sides. Trusting him completely would
be like believing Gould (or Dawkins) because he writes
lucid popularizations, and dismissing all competing notions
of evolution.
> I do think your statement is true when it comes to computer languages.
Me too.
Alex McGuire escreveu:
> Cesar Rabak wrote:
> [snip]
>
>> A lot of linguists say that Language shapes thinking and vice versa.
>
>
> I don't think that's true nowadays.
>
> I think that most linguists now consider that although any two languages
> may differ in vocabulary size, and individual terms, the concepts
> expressible in each are equivalent.
Probably yes, as more and more cultures are cross breeding.
>
> There used to be an idea that thinkable concepts differed between
> languages, IIRC one linguist claimed that the native american language
> Hopi had no concept of time. This claim turned out to be nonsense, and
> made without the linguist actually meeting any native or fluent Hopi
> speakers, however these ideas persisted for some time.
Funny never heard about this. But, I've heard and read of similar
misconceptions about 'such concept cannot be [well] expressed in
language X' etc.
>
> Steven Pinker's 'The Language Instinct' has a good account of this.
Will try to grab it
>
>
> I do think your statement is true when it comes to computer languages.
>
:-)
cheers,
--
Cesar Rabak
Cesar Rabak <······@acm.org> writes:
> A lot of linguists say that Language shapes thinking and vice versa. So
> probably is a sort of feedback mechanism.
that's why lisp hackers and C++ hackers tend not to understand each
other - the hardware gets incompatible over the years :-)
--
(espen)
* Cesar Rabak:
> A lot of linguists say that Language shapes thinking...
Whorf says it. Lispniks know better.
--
"Hurry if you still want to see something. Everything is vanishing."
-- Paul C�zanne (1839-1906)
Cesar Rabak wrote:
>
>
> A lot of linguists say that Language shapes thinking and vice versa. So
> probably is a sort of feedback mechanism.
>
My opinion, which is mine and belongs to me, is that this is one of those
debates where either absolute position is wrong.
Language helps shape thinking - but so does the underlying hardware and
the fundamental constraints of human existence. It's just the nature/nurture
debate all over again. Both sides have important points to make, neither
should be ignored.
Bear
On Mon, 01 Mar 2004 16:30:04 +0100, Pascal Costanza <········@web.de>
wrote:
> The following refers to events that have occurred in this newsgroup
> mainly in 2002, with some aftermath in 2003. When I have entered this
> newsgroup in order to participate in public discussions about Lisp and
> related topics in 2002, I have made the mistake to allow myself to be
> dragged into off-topic discussions of a very unhealthy nature. These
> discussions involved some strong exchange of blows between Erik Naggum
> and myself. During those discussions and later on, I have been misled to
> attack him personally on various occasions although it would have been
> wiser to stay calm and objective. I regret to have acted like that, and
> I would like to apologize for these actions of mine in the past,
> especially to Erik Naggum, but also to other people who have felt
> strongly distracted by these unproductive postings. I hope it will be
> possible for all those concerned to regard this as an offer to settle
> things.
>
> Background information: The reason why this apology comes very late is
> that I have hoped that this issue could be dealt with in the background
> at some stage, via email or some other form of private communication.
> However, now that I have announced the 1st European Lisp and Scheme
> Workshop, that is co-organized by several people including myself, Erik
> Naggum has contacted me and expressed an insistence on an apology in the
> same forum in which the attacks have occurred. I understand that Erik
> Naggum is a very important contributor to the Lisp community and that
> many people would like to see him participate in a Lisp workshop,
> especially one that is going to take place in Oslo - apparently his
> hometown and one of the European cities with a very strong Lisp
> community. Since I believe that it is more important that this workshop
> serves the whole community rather than anyone's ego, I have decided to
> make this public apology.
>
>
> Pascal
>
OK I contacted his sister and transcribed the aplology.
From here it is up to ypu.
John
--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/