Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
From: cyber_surfer@wildcard.demon.co.uk (Cyber Surfer)
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!MathWorks.Com!udel!gatech!swrinde!pipex!demon!wildcard.demon.co.uk!cyber_surfer
Subject: Re: Lisp advocacy (Was Re: another take on "C is faster than lisp")
References: <778955109snz@wildcard.demon.co.uk> <vrotneyCvutoq.MLt@netcom.com> <779204788snz@wildcard.demon.co.uk> <Cw31oK.6px@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Organization: The Wildcard Killer Butterfly Breeding Ground
Reply-To: cyber_surfer@wildcard.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Demon Internet Simple News v1.27
Lines: 53
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 1994 20:27:25 +0000
Message-ID: <779660845snz@wildcard.demon.co.uk>
Sender: usenet@demon.co.uk

In article <Cw31oK.6px@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk "Jeff Dalton" writes:

> What's with this psychological analysis?  "Insecure"?  How do
> you know why they do it?

It's a general observation about people who agressively defend
their beliefs. It wasn't about anyone specific. Sometimes you
can tell that a person has a vested interest in their point of
view, and they can't be blamed for that. Other times, I'm not
sure why someone feels so strongly negative about something that
they're not compelled to use. Of course, it's possible that they
_are_ compelled to use it, but that's another issue.
 
> Also, how did defending a choice get turned into advocacy?
> Surely advocacy is more "active" than that.

I agree. However, advocacy for some people means making nagative
comments about another person's choice. Perhaps some people find
X vs Y debates to be interesting, but reading them for over two
years, I've either lost whatever interest I once had in the subject,
or the comments aren't so interesting any more, or the first thread
I read comparing Lisp and C was a particularly fine example. It ended
when someone suggested compiling code written in Lisp into C, which
was what I had been waiting for someine to say.
 
> I tend to defend the reasonableness of choosing Lisp against
> claims that it's not reasonable.  But I don't say Lisp is better
> than other languages or go into random newsgroups trying to
> convert people.  I don't say "you should use Lisp for this
> because...".

I have no problem with you doing that. I simply wish to avoid
reading such msgs. Please continue, I won't stop you! As if I
could! No, I'm merely proposing an advocacy newsgroup for such
debates. That seems innocent enough to me.

It's been done for operating systems like NT and OS/2, which are
prone to the same problems as Lisp, for what I guess could be
similar reasons. I'm sure that there are some people who have very
good reasons to use the OS that they do, and I have no reason to
"convert" them, as if that might be possible. Still, this is exactly
what _some_ people try to do.

If they merely wish to correct some misinformation about a product
or family of products, that's another matter, but it could still
be done in an advocacy newsgroup. I don't see problem with that,
and I'm not sure I understand why you think there is a problem,
or what it might be.

-- 
Future generations are relying on us
It's a world we've made - Incubus	
We're living on a knife edge, looking for the ground -- Hawkwind
