perl [was: in defense of Java, again]
sjansen at buscaluz.org
Fri Jan 27 10:23:28 MST 2006
On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 10:07 -0700, Roberto Mello wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2006 at 09:55:47AM -0700, Stuart Jansen wrote:
> > Finally, if there's any confusion about the 'distinction between
> > "putting down Perl" and "putting down Perl programmers"', it's entirely
> > your fault. You've not been doing a good job of maintaining the
> > distinction.
> That sentence is adamant and certain that it seems to take the
> reader's interpreation of Jonathan's messages completely out of the
> equation. It also seems pretty darn close to an ad hominem.
Yup. I never did go for subtle.
I see the difference between my behavior and Jonathon's thusly: I knew
that what I was saying was overbroad and likely to inflame. I accepted
that (and the inherent chance it would be completely ignored). He
claimed his presentation wasn't meant to insult or inflame and that
everyone else was at fault for misinterpreting him. He's been repeatedly
and kindly told (by others) that he was being insulting and seem to be
unwilling to acknowledge that fact. I'm pretty handy with a sledge
hammer, so I chose to use it.
Stuart Jansen e-mail/jabber: sjansen at buscaluz.org
google talk: stuart.jansen at gmail.com
:0 # copy & paste for your convenience
/dev/null # /ignore sjansen!*@*
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://plug.org/pipermail/plug/attachments/20060127/be0505b9/attachment.bin
More information about the PLUG