From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_05 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 3 Sep 93 19:44:43 GMT
From: news.crd.ge.com!e7sa!groleau@uunet.uu.net  (Wes Groleau x1240 C73-8)
Subject: Re: Hoare's gripes about Ada (should be so what)
Message-ID: <CCsMuJ.HE8@crdnns.crd.ge.com>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

I already dropped the post, so I don't know who the guilty party is, but:

When a certain demagogue misquotes, or exaggerates the words of a respected
member of our profession, one of two responses (IMHO) is appropriate:

1. Ignore him.
2. Flame the demagogue.

IMHO, flaming the "respected member" is not appropriate even if the "respected
member" is wrong.

Those who are aware that demagogue is not the right word, please correct me
without flames.