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