Re: Is this group dead?
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 10:55:02 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <nce2e6$icr$1_at_gioia.aioe.org>
James K. Lowden wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Mar 2016 10:37:58 +0000 (UTC)
> Roy Hann <specially_at_processed.almost.meat> wrote:
>
>> There is no good reason why the ideas discussed here couldn't be
>> discussed on LinkedIn or similar. But any good points would be diluted
>> to homepathic concentrations owing to the vastly greater number of
>> resolutely ignorant participants there.
>
> Actually, you just contradicted yourself there: homeopathic
> concentration is a good reason.
Well yes. I should have said there is no reason why ideas couldn't be raised. They would fail to be discussed (to my profit). Okay.
(I hope I'm not asking to live in an echo chamber!)
> I have yet to see a better forum for online discussion than a mailing
> list or the usenet.
Me neither.
> The "problem" for c.d.t, if there is one, is that there's not much to
> talk about.
Now there I disagree. I am old enough that I missed out on any formal education in modern database theory. All of the little I know is from reading the likes of de Haan and Koppelaars, and Date and Darwen, seasoned with the provocations of the likes of Pascal, and you people here.
This group could well be useful to those trying to break new ground. Who could say? But it has definitely been very useful to me, testing my understanding (or even my slight grasp) of the old ground, alerting me --too often--to my own fallacies and mis-readings.
Where else can I get that?
Roy Received on Thu Mar 17 2016 - 11:55:02 CET