Mark Lundquist wrote:
> Similarly, I don't understand the
> level of contempt that would lead someone to stuff the ballot
> box. Someone actually thought ESJ was dumb enough not to check
> for duplicate votes, and that they didn't deserve enough respect
> not to multiple-vote. As a result team-ada ended up looking like
> bozos.
Is this true that they know the ballot box was stuffed? I thought
I read they "suspected" it was being stuffed. If we did do it,
shame on us. I was hoping (or getting my hopes up) to see
some useful numbers.
Frank Beard
FB Inc. Consulting
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Lundquist [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2000 1:36 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: "Why Not Ada"
>
> > I read through the comments posted at the SlashDot site, and some of the
> > misinformation was so mind-bogglingly ludicrous that it warranted its
> own
> > Douglas Adams' metaphors. I was embarrassed for some of the
> contributors
> > that they not just believed, but would actually post, such foolishness.
> >
>
> In spite of this, I was really pleased to see the question "Why not
> Ada?" being posted on Slashdot. That Ada is on people's radar screens
> is a Good Thing. I'm not seeing "Why not Haskell?" out there, for
> instance... (no offense intended to any Haskell fanatics :-)
>
> These are good opportunities for the Ada community to rise to the
> occasion by dispelling mythology and FUD in a gracious way. Here are
> some guidelines I try to keep in mind -- maybe they will work for others
> as well:
>
> 1) Don't mistake ignorance for stupidity, or either one for malice.
> The task is to educate.
>
> 2) There are people who are able to write in a reasonably articulate
> and persuasive style about things of which they in fact have no
> real knowledge. The Internet breeds this type of person, and I
> know because I have fallen into this trap myself before. A good
> example is the guy on /. who was parroting the "designed by
> committee" and "feature creep" mythology. He actually sounds
> like he might know what he's talking about, if one didn't know
> any better. Have sympathy for these people, but correct them so
> they can become propagators of facts instead of fiction.
> Treating them right may help win them over. Remember, this
> person likes to be right, so if you give them good evidence they
> will often change their tune unless they are unusually
> opinionated.
>
> 3) There's way too much paranoia and "fortress mentality" in the
> Ada community, so make a conscious effort to overcome it. It
> really doesn't play well to the rest of the world.
>
> Someone posted regarding the Embedded Systems Journal on-line
> poll that "they'll just keep re-running it until they get the
> answer they want". I just don't understand this type of
> thinking. ESJ was under no obligation to run the poll in the
> first place, nor to include Ada in it. They way to really trash
> Ada would be to deliberately ignore it. ESJ included Ada in
> their poll, and they were equanimous enough to list the languages
> in alphabetical order :-). Similarly, I dont't understand the
> level of contempt that would lead someone to stuff the ballot
> box. Someone actually thought ESJ was dumb enough not to check
> for duplicate votes, and that they didn't deserve enough respect
> not to multiple-vote. As a result team-ada ended up looking like
> bozos.
>
> If we want others to think we have our heads up our
> u-know-where, all we have to do is justify their beliefs by
> our actions :-)
>
>
> --
>
> Mark Lundquist
> Senior Software Engineer
> Rational Software
> Development Solutions Business Unit
> Aloha, OR, USA
|