Re: Nathan's farewell...

[ljsilicon@aol.com (LJSILICON)]

Jeffrey Robertson wrote (rather belated...)

>>Answers without the asbestos underware.
>
>Also without accuracy.  Or the insight which comes from being the author of
>the s/w in question.
>

I agree that accuracy will be missed if the author takes a powder. That,
however, is the author's choice. There are a lot of questions being answered by
non-authors/non-developers. They also do not include the standard "haven't you
read my FAQ?" response.

>We're leaving, either with
>great fanfare like Nathan, or just slipping away (like me -- I haven't
>read or posted in months).  Like Todd said, this n/g is being reduced
>to self-congradulatory posts from the "victors".  The signal to noise
>ratio is *worse* after Nathan's departure.

I highly disagree with you on that. There are more helpful posts here in the
last month than were seen in some time at CSA2. The rants and the "your a
pirate" comments are the only thing missing. Signal-to-noise is way down; not
only here but on Delphi. Little is being said about how Nathan was quietly
ushered out over there...

>The steady departure of old-timers from this n/g is no good thing.

Not necessarily so; new blood (a transfussion of sorts) may help out. Too many
people are caught up in theie "I know it all" attitude. 

As for the "minority of victors" statement; no victory is claimed and no count
has been taken. Nathan was asked time and again to respond without the rants;
he could not handle, nor understand that simple request. 

LJSilicon