🚀 go-pugleaf

If John Mashey can post 300+ lines of marketing counter-measures, then I can
post a few lines about my OPINIONS too.

I think these discussions are very interesting, after all, I did read all
of John's posting, but they are nearly completely inappropriate for comp.arch,
IN MY OPINION.  Even the note that precipitated John's note was dicey.

I understand why John posted:  there is a sensitivity to inaccurate
statements, perceived or actual, that are interpreted as slurs against one's
own stuff.  How many times I have resisted the urge....  But, my gosh, there
was so little architecture content that I was distressed.

Disclaimers:  I am not without sin in this area.  I still like and encourage
your postings, John.  This group would certainly be dry without a little
"feet on the ground, how to sell this stuff"-type discussion.  Yes, I can
simply skip any particular note or complete discussion that I don't like.
Maybe I am alone in my interpretation of John's note.  If so, just tell me
to go away.

BUT, this seems on the verge of getting out of hand.  I mean, the performance
brief stuff is one thing.  However, when I see terms like "price-performance"
etc. in a comp.arch posting I look sideways at the content.

Again:  I am not without sin here.  Witness this note!  I am saying we
should all work harder to stay true to the subject.