Re: Lessons

From: mAsterdam <>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 02:40:40 +0100
Message-ID: <45d26880$0$328$>

paul c wrote:
> mAsterdam wrote:

>> Having been plonked by Bob for "intellectual dishonesty" -
>> as usual with his chilling twit filter habits no rebuttal
>> chance whatsoever - I don't feel invited to this game of his.
>> Yet I see some interesting points here, I hope you do not
>> mind me butting in.
>> ...

> I think you're entitled, more more than the handful of repetitious
> triflers here, among whom I don't consider you one. For a public
> free-for-all, it surprises me than only about half of the stuff here is
> nonsense (at least to me it's only half to me, as they say, the mileage
> of others will vary up or down). Even if I don't understand your
> motives, you write earnest stuff and nobody should ever criticize that.

Heh. Thanks. We never had a serious disagreement and I suspect that if it would ever come to a pissing contest on cdt that you'd win.

My motives are simple. I am a data management professional at a financial corporation and I like my job for the challenges it brings. The topics I engage in at cdt are the topics I don't have a (short term) justification to engage in at my work and yet feel are interesting.

>> OID only works if either
>>  - some authority really takes care of it
>>    (so it becomes a value) or

> that exposes the typical celko message, appeal to "higher" authority
> without explaining why it should be respected as being higher. Too lazy
> or too ignorant to justify why a suggestion stands on its own. most of
> us are sheep and go along with this.

There should be a law against criminal obedience.

>>  - they really are not exposed to users - which requires a lot
>>    of development team discipline (it /is/ possible though,
>>    I have seen it in practice).
>> ...

> too drunk to type what i meant to say about this and the rest, it could
> have been my attempt to distinguish humanism from corporatism, sorry.

Chin chin!

Your humanist,

                        mAsterdam Received on Wed Feb 14 2007 - 02:40:40 CET

Original text of this message