Comment: I must be missing something (Score 1) on 2010.06.14 4:18
You don't like Perl 6.
You did not involve yourself in that project.
You don't like what others have done.
You have some weird ideas on how community projects work: you think that there's a cabal that controls the project. Well, you may call it a cabal, but anyone can join. You just have to write some idea in the mailing lists, or talk on the IRC channels, or submit a patch to the code or the documentation.
If you have an interest in the outcome of the project, you don't ignore it for 12 years and then complain about what others have done.
On the other hand, you are completely entitled to your opinions, and to write them down for all to read. You are also entitled to use whatever programming language you like. I, for one, don't care if you write Python, Ruby, Java, or Visual Basic (I've written code in Python, Java, C++, even Pascal, and got paid for it, so what?).
You may even design and implement your ideal programming language, and we may even like it enough to use it.
Second point, and the one I just don't understand:
How do you jump from "I don't like what Perl6 has become" to "I'll try to make life difficult for one person"?
In other words, why do you think you have a say in how a person (that's not you) presents himself to the world? If chromatic wants to be know by seven different names, it's his choice.
Also, he can decide to delete all the comments in his weblog, and that's perfectly fine. You know why? Because it's *his* weblog. You have your own place (here), where you can write whatever you want.
How is not approving a comment a "violent, frightened response to a threat"? If I invite people in my house, and I discover that I don't like one of them, am I not allowed to say "go away and don't come back, I don't like you"?
You say you believe in individual freedoms, yet you deny others the freedom of choosing who they talk to. I'm confused.