Jonathan Revusky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
Now, what is sort of sad and pathetic about this is that I get the
[...]
...little dissembling child...
[...]
It's a big joke. That's how blatant it is!
[...]
...mega-clown...
[...]
I don't give a ****.
[...]
When I say I don't give a flying ****
[...]
Considering the fact that other developers have to ask you even dumb
questions if they want to work with FM,
Frankly, I don't know what you're talking about, Henning. If you had any questions to ask about FM, this is not the appropriate forum anyway. If I have judged wrong, and you are genuinely interested in FM, please post whatever questions you have in the appropriate place, i.e. the fm-devel or fm-user lists. I think you'd find that people are quite helpful.
I must say that you have a pretty strange way of working with people.
Henning, somebody might infer from the above that you have attempted to work with me in the past, that you have some experience of this... i.e. that you know what you're talking about. However, I have to state, for the record, that this is not the case. You and I have never collaborated on anything and it is likely that we never will. Given that, your comments about my ways of working with people are quite hard to process or make any sense of.
Walking around insulting people being genuinely interested in your project isn't IMHO exactly the thing that helps it.
Okay, this really should be my last message addressed to you in this particular forum. I am going to give you complete benefit of the doubt and assume that you really are genuinely interested, as you claim above. If that is so, there are forums set up for the purpose of discussing FM. This is not such a forum, as other people have already pointed out.
Now, in terms of this personal business of your feeling so insulted, I will also give you the benefit of the doubt. I believe that you don't sense just how obnoxious you come across to me and certain other people.
This could be a misunderstanding, so I will do you the favor of explaining the reasons why we would have such a negative perception.
It is my experience in this discussion that you repeat arguments that are *obvious* self-serving distortions. Just as an example (though it's probably *the* A-1-A egregious example) probably everybody moderately familiar with the situation we've been discussing knows that it is true that everybody or almost everybody who uses Turbine also uses Velocity for their view layer. However, everybody also knows that this is simply because it was set up as the default. Moreover, support for other alternatives was never kept up-to-date, which would have greatly discouraged anybody from using them. Also, to pretend that there is no "positioning" effect in the fact that Velocity is also a jakarta project is kind of to insult people's intelligence.
Given this, to come out with stuff like: "Well, we used to offer people the choice, but they all opted for Velocity" is so obviously a stacked or rigged comparison... I mean, of course everybody opted for Velocity. It was set up as the default and you actively discouraged usage of alternatives. And everybody familiar with this industry knows the power of being the "default". This, not technical merit, is the "secret" behind the success of Microsoft products, for example.
So, from my POV, this is such a rigged, dishonest kind of argument, that to keep repeating it (even when I and Daniel point out that the inherent dishonesty and rigged nature of it) is really a form of aggression, you know. Consider this from our POV: You spout this nonsense -- and, I'm sorry, at least from my POV and that of other people, it is definitely perceive as complete nonsense. We point out that it's nonsense, that it's based on a completely rigged comparison, and what do you do? You simply keep repeating the same (and from our POV discredited) nonsense.
Under the circumstances, I do not believe that you can represent that you're just behaving all innocent and we're attacking you. That's not what's happening. Whether you are conscious of it or not, your behavior is highly provocative. I am giving you the benefit of the doubt, so I assume that you are not quite aware of this.
But, again, I am not perfect (who is?) and I should not have referred to you as a clown. I apologize for that. As for my statement that I did not "give a ****" whether Turbine re-introduced FM support, that was quite truthful. However, my irritation was showing through in the way I phrased it. I should not have phrased it that way. However, what I said on that stands: You guys removed the FM support. If you guys want it back, then you guys put it back. Don't expect us to do it. You know, I think that's how anybody would react under similar circumstances. This business where you just tacitly assumed that I'm willing to go out of my way to help you put it back rubbed me the wrong way. I perceived it as obnoxious -- given the history of the whole thing.
Now, I recognize that I got irritated and that I shouldn't have called you a clown, but I think you might review some of your own behavior and honestly assess whether you did contribute to the situation.
Best Regards,
Jonathan Revusky -- lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/ FreeMarker-Velocity comparison page, http://freemarker.org/fmVsVel.html
Regards Henning
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
