Clint, Thanks for the offer. Let's talk offline about practical details.
More generally: I have a strong belief that alu.org if it continues to exist should be a site about the ALU (organises conferences, "etc" whatever that means) and that lisp.org should be a -- new -- site about Lisp, as in python.org. Ah, but there are several lisps, none quite the same. So would we have common.lisp.org etc (or equivalent naming schemes, I don't care)? Or would we say that racket and scheme and emacs lisp and so on already have functioning websites and it's just the Common Lisp community that's never got its act together? Or what? - nick > On 12 Oct 2017, at 08:15, Clint Moore <[email protected]> wrote: > > I care, and am my company is willing to spend time and money to keep it and > the ALU content on the air, so to speak. Frankly, it would be an honor. > > I get that no one of note knows me and almost certainly no one knows of my > company, so it'd be a stretch to trust me with anything, but the offer is > there. > > >> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 10:35 PM Nick Levine <[email protected]> wrote: >> Now that we've established why lisp.org and its friends are long-term off >> air... >> >> The website at lisp.org contained a photo of John McCarthy (and nothing >> else) since the week he died six years ago. What's the message? >> >> In contrast take a quick look at (say) python.org, a site devoted to really >> assisting people to use that language. >> >> Do we care, and if we do how do we go about effecting change? >> >> - nick >>
