[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Rigged Aggregators?

• To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <len.bullard@i...>
• Subject: Re: Rigged Aggregators?
• From: Peter Hunsberger <peter.hunsberger@g...>
• Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 09:41:14 -0600
• Cc: "xml-dev@lists. xml. org" <xml-dev@l...>
• Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=ihKE7kE009reTGYAvpZYhi8ZDy1jwBh+wCwbciEDhQSVkcmyXks3vuVlylWvP3ChqtmiyD8uIoxS8cXnQV+C4VUhLSbqEG1CuQ9hhHr3UTy8CMnF+rAx8BpufR3HQCeXs0g0lUJ3ylncPeqHV1pI9/tBujHHUxbAfUjd9IpJkXI=
• In-reply-to: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE07206CC4@h...>
• References: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE07206CC4@h...>
• Reply-to: Peter Hunsberger <peter.hunsberger@g...>

On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 09:24:36 -0600, Bullard, Claude L (Len)
<len.bullard@i...> wrote:

> That won't be good enough.  Not nearly.   The American
> electorate is evenly split.  

The nut cases are going to glue themselves to the visible issues of the day...

> The world electorate is
> expressing a displeasure.   While these are not logically
> conjunctive, they are symbolically and it is the semiotic
> effect that creates superstitious behavior. 

Me-thinks you read too much into this...

<snip/>

> That's the way it works.  Smart knowledgeable people can
> refute it but he doesn't believe them because he believes
> he has 'inside information'.  This is the classic routine
> known as Tootsie Fruitsie (See "A Day At The Races" The
> Marx Brothers).  It is exploited everyday in marketing,
> sales and other political pursuits.
> 
> So it is necessary to do more than say "Bollox".  Some
> patience and attention to detail is needed.  If we don't
> get it from the press, we have to state it where the
> press hangs out.  XML-Dev is one of those places.  Sometimes
> a vital kernel of fact drops from this and that is always
> worth saving.

I don't think much attention to detail is possible: there's no real
detail to respond to.  One can't attempt to use rational response to
the irrational.

> So I have to respectfully disagree with you.  Had the article
> not been forwarded to me for comment, I wouldn't have noticed.
> Because it was and from someone who blogs prominently, I thought
> it a good idea to get experts to look it over.  As in open source,
> the more smart eyes, the better.

Sure, that's the reason I've taken the time to respond: the more
people on this list saying "nonsense" the better. Personally, I don't
think you can expect anything more.

-- 
Peter Hunsberger

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Rigged Aggregators?
    • From: "Nathan Young" <natyoung@c...>

• References:
  • RE: Rigged Aggregators?
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <len.bullard@i...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Is there a way to reuse and extend an enumeration in XML schema
• Next by Date: RE: Rigged Aggregators?
• Previous by thread: RE: Rigged Aggregators?
• Next by thread: Re: Rigged Aggregators?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread