"Peter Lairo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Asa Dotzler wrote:
> > Jason Bassford wrote:
>
> >>> Andrew, because Peter thinks his keyword is really useful I'm giving
> >>> you a list of bugs that Peter has determined to be low risk (they're
> >>> not,
> >> Peter never said that they were low risk. In fact, he has
> >> repeatedly said that they were only suggestions and that, since he's
> >> not a programmer (something else he's said repeatedly), it was up to
> >> those who are programmers to tell him if they are low risk or not. The
> >> only thing he's said is that he *believes* that they *might* be
> >> low risk.
> > So it's time for programmers to stop what they're doing and evaluate
> > bugs to see if Peter's keyword is accurate? I believe I just read a post
> > from Peter saying that keywords should be added when they fit and
> > another post saying that he has no way of knowing whether his keyword
> > fits because he's not a developer.
>
> Please don't misquote me! I never said I had "no" way of knowing.
> Anybody who puts some thought to it is likely to make a pretty decent
> evaluation of a bug. And with experience, the evaluations will improve.
Right. That's why colleges offer degree programs
in computer science: because it's a cakewalk and
anybody can do it whether they know anything
about programming or not. Really. Honest.
Say, I've got some pristine swampland in Florida
I'd like to sell ya...
