RFD: rmgroup comp.lang.eiffel, a defunct newsgroup dedicated to a dead non-language

RFD: rmgroup comp.lang.eiffel, a defunct newsgroup dedicated to a dead non-language

[Anonymous]

                      REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
                     defunct group comp.lang.eiffel

This is a formal Request for Discission (RFD) for the removal of the
newsgroup comp.lang.eiffel.  This is not a Call for Votes (CFV); you
cannot vote at this time.  Procedural details are below.

OPPONENT: Doug Brown

RATIONALE: No one uses Eiffel anymore. Even Bertrand Meyer quit peddling it.

Please remove this defunct newsgroup or alias it to alt.fan.bertrand-meyer.

PROCEDURE:

This is a request for discussion, not a call for votes.  In this phase
of the process, any potential problems with the proposed group removal
should be raised and resolved.  The discussion period will continue
for a minimum of 21 days (starting from when the first RFD for this
proposal is posted to news.announce.newgroups), after which a Call For
Votes (CFV) will be posted by a neutral vote taker.  Please do not
attempt to vote until this happens.

All discussion of this proposal should be posted to news.groups.

This RFD attempts to comply fully with the Usenet newsgroup creation
guidelines outlined in "How to Create a New Usenet Newsgroup" and "How
to Format and Submit a New Group Proposal".  Please refer to these
documents (available in news.announce.newgroups) if you have any
questions about the process.

DISTRIBUTION:

This RFD has been posted to to the following newsgroups:

     news.groups,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.c++,comp.object,comp.edu,
     comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.databases.object,soc.culture.jewish

Re: RFD: rmgroup comp.lang.eiffel, a defunct newsgroup dedicated to a dead non-language

[Clemens Dumat]

Anonymous wrote about "RFD: rmgroup comp.lang.eiffel, a defunct newsgroup
dedicated to a dead non-language":

> REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD) defunct group comp.lang.eiffel
> ...

This doesn't seem to be meant seriously, so i think it should be
sent to abuse@replay.com, shouldn't it?

So long..

  Clemens

Re: RFD: rmgroup comp.lang.eiffel, a defunct newsgroup dedicated to a dead non-language

[Don Harrison]

QUIZ

When is an anonymous poster not anonymous?


Don.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Don Harrison             donh@syd.csa.com.au

Re: RFD: rmgroup comp.lang.eiffel, a defunct newsgroup dedicated to a dead non-language

[William Grosso]

Don Harrison wrote:
> 
> QUIZ
> 
> When is an anonymous poster not anonymous?
> 

When he's a jar ? 


Cheers,

Andy
-- 

"Nicht jeder der ein Bart traegt, ist schon Prophet"
		Middle-Eastern proverb, rendered in German

Re: RFD: rmgroup comp.lang.eiffel, a defun

[Ian Ward]

In article 625@syd.csa.com.au, donh@syd.csa.com.au (Don Harrison) writes:
:>QUIZ
:>
:>When is an anonymous poster not anonymous?
:>
:>
:>Don.
:>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
:>Don Harrison             donh@syd.csa.com.au
:>
>

When he is on of the "sources close to the Prime-Minister?"

---
Ian Ward's opinions only : wardi@rsd.bel.alcatel.be

Re: RFD: rmgroup comp.lang.eiffel, a defunct newsgroup dedicated to a dead non-language

[Doug Semler]

Don Harrison <donh@syd.csa.com.au> writes:

> QUIZ When is an anonymous poster not anonymous?

42! :)

---
Doug Semler                       | drsemler@uci.edu
University of California, Irvine  | Garbage In -- Gospel Out
Information and Computer Science  | Minister of things to do Next Quarter
http://www.ics.uci.edu/~dsemler   | (but will Never Be Done) DNRC  O-
A closed mind is a terrible thing | Bus Error (passengers dumped)

If Unix isn't inferior to Windows, then why does the marketplace
consistently chose Windows over Unix?  Are you a socialist who believes
the marketplace does not make the most optimal choices?

Re: RFD: rmgroup comp.lang.eiffel, a defunct newsgroup dedicated to a dead non-language

["Paul E. Bennett"]

In article <p9ohfy4q6c.fsf@octavian.ics.uci.edu>
           dsemler@octavian.ics.uci.edu "Doug Semler" writes in his sig:

> If Unix isn't inferior to Windows, then why does the marketplace
> consistently chose Windows over Unix?  Are you a socialist who believes
> the marketplace does not make the most optimal choices?

because they beleived the lies.

-- 
Paul E. Bennett <peb@transcontech.co.uk>
Transport Control Technology Ltd.
+44 (0)117-9499861
Going Forth Safely

Re: RFD: rmgroup comp.lang.eiffel, a defunct newsgroup dedicated to a dead non-language

[Larry J. Elmore]

Doug Semler <dsemler@octavian.ics.uci.edu> wrote in article
<p9ohfy4q6c.fsf@octavian.ics.uci.edu>...
>
> If Unix isn't inferior to Windows, then why does the marketplace
> consistently chose Windows over Unix?  Are you a socialist who believes
> the marketplace does not make the most optimal choices?

It depends on what you are doing, what your requirements are. For many
jobs, Windows just can't cut it. Most web servers run some flavor of Unix,
as do most workstations. In these instances, it _is_ inferior. Many people
would argue that the MacOS is clearly superior to Windows (vastly superior
to Win 3.1), and in some ways, I agree with them. Of course, for a number
of historical reasons, Windows has the market share and a vastly larger
software base, so in that sense, it is superior (though mainly due to
Apple's recently abandoned policy of trying to keep the whole Mac market to
itself, thereby keeping 100% of a shrinking market share instead of a
smaller percentage slice (but of increasing size) of an increasingly large
pie).

One does not have to be a socialist to lament the fact that Microsoft
Windows is dominant on PC's. The code bloat of Win95 and slowdown in
performance (offset by more memory, bigger hard drives and faster CPU's) is
even worse than what has happened to many software packages. Because of
historical realities, nothing is likely to displace it anytime soon. Just
because it dominates the market doesn't mean that in many ways it's a pig!

Re: RFD: rmgroup comp.lang.eiffel, a defunct newsgroup dedicated to a dead non-language

[Robert Dewar]

Larry Elmore responded to Doug Semler's flame bait signature

> If Unix isn't inferior to Windows, then why does the marketplace
> consistently chose Windows over Unix?  Are you a socialist who believes
> the marketplace does not make the most optimal choices?

with a discussion of technical merits, and fell into the (I assume quite
intentional) trap that this signature invites.

Yes, of course Unix is inferior to Windows IN ITS ABILITY TO ACHIEVE
MARKET SHARE, that of course is the only respect in which you can guage
inferiority by measuring market share!

This of course has nothing one way or another to do with technical
superiority one way or another, even assuming that such a vague and
general concept has any meaning (in practice, the notion of technical
superiority is much too general, different tools are appropriate for
different circumstances -- surely no one thinks that home computer users
should all be using Unix!

Re: RFD: rmgroup comp.lang.eiffel, a defunct newsgroup dedicated to a dead non-language

[Kaz Kylheku]

In article <dewar.850573624@merv>, Robert Dewar <dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu> wrote:

>different circumstances -- surely no one thinks that home computer users
>should all be using Unix!

Speak for yourself!

Re: RFD: rmgroup comp.lang.eiffel, a defunct newsgroup dedicated to a dead non-language

[Christopher J. Henrich]

In article <p9ohfy4q6c.fsf@octavian.ics.uci.edu>, Doug Semler
<dsemler@octavian.ics.uci.edu> wrote (in his .sig line):


> 
> If Unix isn't inferior to Windows, then why does the marketplace
> consistently chose Windows over Unix?  Are you a socialist who believes
> the marketplace does not make the most optimal choices?

No, I'm a capitalist who believes that people exercise "bounded rationality."
It would take a lot of effort, especially for someone unfamiliar with
computers, to evaluate all the available choices and settle on the best
one.  It's easier to go with the "obvious" choice, which may be merely the
choice offered by an eye-catching ad or the choice made by one's neighbor.

-- 
Christopher J. Henrich
chenrich@monmouth.com

Re: RFD: rmgroup comp.lang.eiffel, a defunct newsgroup dedicated to a dead non-language

[Brian R. Hanson]

Anonymous (Likely CJIII) wrote:
> 
>                       REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
>                      defunct group comp.lang.eiffel
> 
> This is a formal Request for Discission (RFD) for the removal of the
> newsgroup comp.lang.eiffel.  This is not a Call for Votes (CFV); you
> cannot vote at this time.  Procedural details are below.

Another interesting development from CJIII.  I suspect that by using
lots of forged identities he might even make this happen.

-- Brian Hanson
-- brh@cray.com