I disagree that it's a ghetto, but there's certainly scope for improvement.
On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 6:54 PM, Simon Ochsenreither < [email protected]> wrote: > > It's not an attack: it's the reality check that says that in academia you >> >> discuss about what's the better technology on paper, outside academia you >> >> discuss about what's the better technology in the sense that sells more. >> >> Nothing more, nothing less. > > > Maybe that's the reason why this mailing list has become such an ghetto. > There seems to be no chance to have a sensible, constructive debate about > technical topics without people thinking they have to do "reality checks" > on other people (and think that's "OK"?). > > In my opinion, you're not even trying to participate constructively, you > make up non-rational requirements instead to kill of discourse. Basically, > every technology would need to get more "popular" than Java before you > would assess it's technical benefits and disadvantages? Is that right? > That's basically what I gather from your comments. > > > >> You're not answering, might I know why? :-) >> > > Because I prefer to stay on topic. > I try to have an intellectual debate, while you try to turn it into some > sort of popularity contest, which I'm – clearly, as indicated – not > interested in. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Java Posse" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/javaposse/-/V_q-cLtzTkUJ. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
