On Wed, 2002-08-14 at 05:07, Curt Sampson wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Lamar Owen wrote:
>
> > > Curt, I think his reply stems from his frustration of chosen content in
> > > many emails that originate from you. We all pretty well understand
> > > postgres has a broken feature. We all understand you see zero value in
> >
> > Knowing Don to some extent, I can say with some assurance that his 'attacks'
> > are never unprovoked.
>
> Sorry; I'm not aware of the circumstances under which one is supposed
> to call someone a "dick-waver" and other such things on a technical
> mailing list.
It was quite clear what he meant but perhaps there is a better technical
term for use in a technical list, some 5-7 letter all-capital acronym
perhaps ;)
But as anyone should give the benefit of doubt, I've been assuming that
you are just playing devil's advocate .
> Perhaps you can explain to me when one should be
> doing this, so I too can do it at the appropriate times.
I guess what he meant was that you were arguing for arguments sake (mine
is better than yours! Yes it is! Yes it is! ...) and not to get to some
solution, dismissing perfectly good arguments with a simple"not true"
statements and suggesting people to read heavy books with the claim that
the truth is somewhere in there ;)
So it seems that the "technical" content of his claim was quite similar
to some of yours ;)
This has been quite bizarre thread, with about half of traffic being
quite reasonable constructive discussion while the other half seems
definitely describable by the the word that would get me in your
killfile ;)
I'll be off to my vacation for two weeks now, and I'll try to come up
with consistent writeup of what our OO features should be (both
inheritance and others).
----------------
Hannu
