C++ standard committee censor different opinions

[P.J. Plauger]

P.J. Plauger posted:



Oprah Winfrey's a billionaire.

Yep. She did what she did very well, and she was careful
to maintain enough control to profit from it. She's certainly
earned my respect.

P.J. Plauger
Dinkumware, Ltd.
http://www.dinkumware.com

 

[David Eng]

Yep. She did what she did very well, and she was careful
to maintain enough control to profit from it. She's certainly
earned my respect.

Another masterpiece of butt licking. You deserve a hall of fame in the
major league butt-licker.

 

[Jonathan Turkanis]

news[email protected]...

Why are you so upset that I use bigot to describe Microsoft and sycophant to
describe you? We all know Microsoft is a bully, that's why US and EU
governments filed lawsuits against her. We all know defending Microsoft as
a nice guy is an sycophant. If you don't like the word sycophant, how about
we call you a butt-licker?

Now you're being a major league butt-licker. Please go off in a corner and
lick your master's asshole.

This is the most disgusting post I've seen in a serious newsgroup,
except for the occassional neo-nazi spam.

P.J. Plauger and Andrew Koenig gave very thoughtful comments on the
future of C++, the standardization process and the software industry
in general despite plenty of indications in your original post that it
needn't be taken seriously. PJP gave very generous 'no comment's when
something much stronger would have been appropriate.

Remember that other people read the crap you write. It makes you look
stupid and nauseates the rest of us.

Jonathan

 

[David Eng]

This is the most disgusting post I've seen in a serious newsgroup,
except for the occassional neo-nazi spam.

P.J. Plauger and Andrew Koenig gave very thoughtful comments on the
future of C++, the standardization process and the software industry
in general despite plenty of indications in your original post that it
needn't be taken seriously. PJP gave very generous 'no comment's when
something much stronger would have been appropriate.

Remember that other people read the crap you write. It makes you look
stupid and nauseates the rest of us.

Don't blame me! PJ Plauger started this flame war (just look my first
post).

What is my crap? All I want to say here is that C++/CLI pollutes C++. I
agree PJP that Microsoft can extend C++. That's fine as long as Microsoft
keeps it as a Microsoft extension, i.e., a proprietary extension. The
problem is Microsoft wants to make it as an ISO standard. How can a
Microsoft extension become an ISO standard? As Mr. Francis Glassborow
stated out, Microsoft is abusing the system. If you can explain to my that
this is all right, I am more glad to apologize to this newsgroup.

 

[Jonathan Turkanis]

Don't blame me! PJ Plauger started this flame war (just look my first
post).

If you say so.

What is my crap?

I quoted the relevant passages.

Jonathan

 

[Keith H Duggar]

Mr. Plauger,

On the behalf of decency and all those who benefit from your postings
I would like to apologize for what you have endured in this thread. I
found the postings and language of David Eng offensive and sickening.

You and the other experts (several in this very thread) are a great
benefit in these forums for those such as me who are seeking to learn.
And I have always admired the fact that ones such as you take time to
share your insights and knowledge with us. Thus, even though I
obviously bear no responsibility for David Eng's behavior, I feel
partly responsible that you sometimes run individuals well removed
from civil discourse as we have observed here while delivering such a
valuable service to the community.

So for what it's worth, I regret what has transpired here and I (and I
know countless others) sincerely appreciate your participation in this
newsgroup.

Keith

 

[P.J. Plauger]

Mr. Plauger,

On the behalf of decency and all those who benefit from your postings
I would like to apologize for what you have endured in this thread. I
found the postings and language of David Eng offensive and sickening.

You and the other experts (several in this very thread) are a great
benefit in these forums for those such as me who are seeking to learn.
And I have always admired the fact that ones such as you take time to
share your insights and knowledge with us. Thus, even though I
obviously bear no responsibility for David Eng's behavior, I feel
partly responsible that you sometimes run individuals well removed
from civil discourse as we have observed here while delivering such a
valuable service to the community.

So for what it's worth, I regret what has transpired here and I (and I
know countless others) sincerely appreciate your participation in this
newsgroup.

Keith

Thanks very much. An open forum has its costs, and its benefits.

P.J. Plauger
Dinkumware, Ltd.
http://www.dinkumware.com

 

[Alexander Terekhov]

:
[...]

We're all volunteers

Tax deductible? I hope. ;-)

regards,
alexander.

 

[Karl Heinz Buchegger]

What is my crap? All I want to say here is that C++/CLI pollutes C++.

Fine. We all read it.
Now go away.

 

[Dietmar Kuehl]

That'll be the paragraph that got the post rejected. If you tone that
down, I'm sure it will get through. While "For C++ programmers, we get
more ugly syntax and confusion, and less spirit of C++." is fine, the
attacks on PJP's motives are not appropriate to a moderated newsgroup.

Indeed, that's the paragraph I objected to and said so (if I remember
correctly) in the rejection of the article. ... and to make one thing
clear: I or any of the other moderators of comp.lang.c++.moderated do not
care who the person is when reviewing an article. I have rejected articles
for flames from several of the highly respected people and actually I
consider rejection of flames as a service to both the newsgroup and the
author of the article: it is fairly easy to ruin one's reputation.