From: Lee Daniel Crocker (lee@piclab.com)
Date: Fri Oct 11 2002 - 12:40:30 MDT
> > I look at it this way: the human comminunication network is
> > not very different from an electronic communication network,
> > and protocols serve the same purposes. The overriding
> > principle in creating protocols is
> > this: be conservative in what you produce, and liberal in
> > what you accept. That's the way to write software that keeps
> > the network flowing smoothly. But notice that there is a
> > distinct assymmetry there: the more conservative the senders,
> > the fewer kinds of messages can be sent over the protocol;
> > the more liberal the receivers, the /more/ kinds of messages
> > it can handle. So while I may agree that politeness can be a
> > good thing, it is important to note that (1) it is not an end
> > in itself, only a /means/ to the end of better communication,
> > and communication should be favored when the two conflict;
> > and (2) it is /more/ important to emphasize the politeness
> > and tolerance of /listeners/ than speakers.
>
> Wise thoughts. How would you judge your response to Olga by these
> standards?
A quick hack. Perhaps with more time to consider I would
have programmed it more carefully, but I would have sent more
or less the same message.
-- Lee Daniel Crocker <lee@piclab.com> <http://www.piclab.com/lee/> "All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past, are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification."--LDC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:17:30 MST