| 1 |
On 8/22/09, Andrew D Kirch <trelane@×××××××.net> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Right, this is called "punishing innovation". It's a hobby of |
| 3 |
> bureaucrats everywhere. |
| 4 |
> It could also be said to be "punishing excellence". |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
If it wasn't a sort of a bug (some omission in the original PMS?), |
| 7 |
then I suppose this could also be described as The Three 'E's: embrace |
| 8 |
(a supposed standard), extend (possibly in an incompatible, hard to |
| 9 |
replicate ways), and extinguish (well, harder to do with FLOSS, but |
| 10 |
you can probably see where I got these 'e's ;) ). I think that also |
| 11 |
Microsoft calls that 'innovation'. :D |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Let's just leave this to the Council. These semantic-pedantic "is not, |
| 14 |
is too"-discussions with Mr. McCreesh never seem to end as both sides |
| 15 |
keep to the logic that if you don't quickly reply to comments which |
| 16 |
are "wrong", then your silence means that the other one was "right". |
| 17 |
There should be some kind of eternal loop detection for these threads |
| 18 |
... :P |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
-- |
| 21 |
Arttu V. |
Archives