Threading and Software Companies

[Scott Kane]

From: "Richmond Mathewson" <geradamas at yahoo.com>


> I access my e-mail account via a standard web-browser, not via an e-mail 
> client; and I suppose this is why my messages don't thread.

No.  That doesn't cause it at all.  What causes a lack of threading is that 
you don't quote what you are responding to and then your replies tend to, or 
even **appear**, to be off the thread.

> I don't have a problem with software companies as such.

Well....  Fair enough.  But I don't buy it....

> However I am confused as to how much, and how Runtime Revolution interacts 
> with its customers and/or users.

They seem to respond pretty well AFAICS

> In the recent thread ("Hammering . . .") Heather Nagey reacted extremely 
> swiftly to an idea that was initiated by myself - and that is really 
> super.

Indeed.

> [The reason for my subsequently posting a list of other ways that the 
> 'problem' with Classic builds could be coped with was because I felt that 
> they were
> worth sharing]

I can't speak for anybody else, but I don't doubt the integrity of your 
desire to share your opionion and would never seek to interfere with that. 
It's more down to the issue that, after two years here, albeit not as long 
as yourself,  all I've really heard you do is complain.  That does become a 
matter of "oh dear... not again."  Of course I could ignore you when you 
start a rant - and to be brutally honest I do - it is all the same 
frustrating.

> I also find it odd that my recent posting was interpreted as a "rant" - it 
> was nothing of the sort; it was a comment on how I felt RR was working on 
> a
> basis that its customers would not require to go on developing software 
> for semi-obsolete operating ystems.

Actually...  What you actually said is:

> Now, with the exception of the millionaires who fool around with RR just 
> for the fun of it, most of us have to produce software that runs on all 
> those "cranky old
> computers" which use operating systems that are below the notice of the 
> demi-gods in Edinburgh.

Which is indeed rather unecessary and pretty much a wasted expression.  By 
your logic anybody other than those that agree with you are millionaires and 
fools.  I'd love to give that statement to a high school "clear thinking" 
class for analysis.

You also said in another related post:

> This sounds a bit like all those other software companies who assume they 
> know what is best for their clients

Also an unecessary swipe and from where I'm standing representitive of a 
chip on the shoulder in respect of  "all those other software companies" 
who, after years of struggle and pain and effort and money often indeed know 
better than their clients, what is best for them, based on experience, 
trends and a good deal of know-how.

> Scott Kane has a small 'problem' which is that he is not very keen on 
> Richmond's "tone of voice". Well, the feeling is fairly mutual; but as we 
> are both adults we
> ought to be sensible about this and avoid ruffling each other's feathers. 
> If the RR use-list only supported one point of view and one style of 
> writing
> it would be worthless.

I must admit I do indeed dislike your "tone of voice" in many of your posts. 
Though generally I disregard them as a little noise in amongst hundreds of 
valuable insights shared on this list.  What I'm really on about is that 
there are ways to get attention without resorting to rhetoric that makes you 
seem to be as spiky as an echidna.

Scott Kane 


_______________________________________
No viruses found in outgoing message
Scanned by iolo AntiVirus® 1.1.8.4
http://www.iolo.com