On Wed, 29 Mar 2000, Andy Lester wrote: >Don't get what? Don't get the concept that "because people are smart, the >presentation of their ideas is irrelvant"? Sounds like you don't get it At All. >Your parallel to Botticelli doesn't hold, because Botticelli handed off a >finished product. Since I don't even slightly understand the relevance of this point, I will let it go. The most I will say is that since the definition of acceptable product and what constitutes an artistic career were themselves at stake, any talk of "finished product" is beside the point. I am not condoning being a jerk. I am saying that this constant wondering about why "smart people" act like jerks is either ill- informed or dishonest. BTW, what you say amounts to "Botticelli had a right to be a world-class jerk"--which is telling. Actually, he was only demanding the kind of respect that seems reasonable now. But I am sure there were people wondering how someone could violate elementary good manners such as sucking up to the aristo- cracy. (This is highly simplified, of course...) >The revolution which we're going through is not about computers. It's >about communication between human beings. Unfortunately, it seems that so >many of the people who drive this revolution really don't care about other >human beings. Actually, petty manners-cops can't possibly know the first thing about revolutions. Hence, their characterizations fall flat. Cast your mind back to when bogus considerations of "niceness" prevented you from telling the truth to some ignorant person... If we ARE full- tilt into a revolution I am amazed we aren't seeing more malcontents, and blood and -atra bilis-. My liking and using Perl doesn't bind me to some community standard of niceness. However, my niceness level does determine the strength of my bond to the community. There's a difference. -- Tushar Samant ~ ~ :wq ==== Want to unsubscribe from Fun With Perl? Well, if you insist... ==== Send email to <fwp-request@technofile.org> with message _body_ ==== unsubscribe