insults

[Kent M. Pitman <KMP at MIT-MC>]

it seems to me that expressions like "knee-jerk anti-LOOPist" are highly
unprofessional and have no place in this discussion. they only serve to
divide people into two camps and do very little good. in discussions like
these, where people have taken very strong stands on things, one would
sometimes like a person to ber able to to accept others' views and change
"sides" rapidly. if one "side" or the other is marked by having been called
names, it can only serve to weaken the ability of that person to correctly make
the technically right decision because s/he has to worry about a host
of personal issues that never should have been involved: will i be branded
a LOOPist? will the <x> community no longer like me or listen to my ideas?...

ALAN's remark about the "knee-jerk anti-LOOPist" does worse than imply
that the person condemns LOOP without supplying an alternative, it suggests
that some people obejct to LOOP as a reflex action and implicit in that is
that they do not use their higher brain functions in the decision. It is,
in my estimation, possible to "correctly condemn" a primitive or feature 
without being able to propose an adequate alternative. Certainly it has
happened many times in Common-Lisp discussions.

i don't even mind the clear sarcasm/humor of ALAN's paranoia because no
one's likely to be hurt by that; it's not very pointed. but, please,
resist the urge to do name-calling. with the general level of passion the
individuals in this group have on particular issues, we just can't afford
to lose track of that we're working together, not against each other.

thanks,