[futurebasic] Re: [FB] lurkers... Poke with Stick?

Message: < previous - next > : Reply : Subscribe : Cleanse
Home   : December 2004 : Group Archive : Group : All Groups

From: Adam Bell <abell@...>
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 20:55:21 -0400
For those who are thoroughly sick of this thread, click away to the 
next message. I, like tedd, couldn't resist a last kick at the can. I 
understood what tedd was saying here, but I don't entirely agree with 

Every store manager I know sends "shoppers" to the competition to 
avoid being seriously undercut. All the automobile companies 
disassemble and reverse engineer the competition. Software authors 
everywhere download demos of competing products to make sure they 
aren't missing a neat feature. Corporate espionage is big business, 
always justified on the grounds that it is "owed to the 
shareholders". You can bet that the authors of SuperCard visit forums 
and lurk in lists of the other HyperCard descendants. That doesn't 
make it moral and ethical (although it's near the edge sometimes), 
but it certainly isn't illegal. Why shouldn't Geoff lurk here, and 
even comment occasionally as long as he's open about who he is? Most 
of us can filter bias or conflict of interest out of anything he 
might say. This isn't a closed, entry by password only, list.

Those of us who own and use FutureBasic prefer it for several reasons 
that have nothing to do with who's in this list. FB is less expensive 
than the competition. It retains the procedural paradigm that many of 
us grew up with instead of the later object-oriented point of view 
that, at least with JavaScript and SuperCard, I always have to 
struggle with. I confess to liking the JS "dot" notation, Forth is an 
extensible language that can be structured as OOP, and in SuperCard, 
scripts really do attach to objects like buttons to define their 
function. I "get" OOP, but I don't normally think that way; there are 
too many interrelationships to understand. Finally, FB is mature, it 
has a great list, and it works. FB's learning curve is more a matter 
of learning the Mac toolbox than the Basic language itself.

I don't mind if Geoff looks over our shoulder to see what's cooking 
and since Mac GUIs tend to converge (with the possible exception of 
MS products), I'm not surprised when competitors end up looking a lot 
alike. Think about browsers - it didn't take long for Safari's tabs 
to propagate, did it? FB stands on it's merits for me. I don't care 
what the competition is doing, and find it a bit flattering that the 
competition cares what we are doing.


>Geoff :
>Here we go again, sorry guys, the following is my opinion:
><opinion> Start of my opinion
>>I don't understand how my recent post is any different from any 
>>other post I have made.
>Yeah, so what's your point -- you just made mine.
>You also said:
>>I don't see how this could be misconstrued as singing the praises 
>>of FutureBasic.
>Look, no one here is saying that you are "singing the praises of 
>FutureBasic" for Pete's sake (sorry Pete). If you were, I don't 
>think we would have any problems with you attending this list.
>But to the contrary, in every post you make, you are either 
>directly, or indirectly, saying that RB is available as an 
>alternative to FB. There are only two reasons for you being on this 
>list, and they are: 1) to keep tabs on FB; 2) to solicit business 
>for RB -- who are you trying to kid?
>>There is nothing in any post I have EVER made to the FutureBasic 
>>list to give anyone reason to suspect my word.
>Suspect your "word"? The value of a person's word is directly 
>proportional to their honesty about the subject they are lending 
>their word.
>From my perspective and opinion, I believe that I, and others, have 
>ample reason to suspect your word when it come to the reasons for 
>you being here. I believe by the fact that you, a person who does 
>not support FB, subscribes to this FB list, is an act of dishonesty; 
>I think your posts, which are not designed to promote or support FB, 
>to this FB forum who's sole purpose is to assist FB'ers, is an act 
>of dishonesty; I think the imitations that I, and others observe, in 
>you trying to copy FB in advertising, substance, and manner are acts 
>of dishonesty. I think that even when it's pointed out to you that 
>your actions are viewed as being dishonest, and at very least is 
>showing an appearance of inappropriately, you remain, is an act of 
>Now, why we should not suspect your reasons for being on this list, 
>and thus your word.
>Granted, not all on this list will agree with my comments and I'm 
>sure I'll be reprimanded for my opinion. But I'll take my chances 
>and tell you openly that I know what you're doing even if others 
>don't realize it and you won't admit to it. You may be fooling some, 
>but not all.
>Your reasons for being here are simply self-serving. You know you 
>can post RB promotions on this list and get away with it under the 
>pretense of "clearing up misconceptions." But, that's not the real 
>reason for you being here.
>Unfortunately, there's no point of anyone objecting, formal or 
>otherwise, because no one is going to throw you off this list and 
>you're not honest enough, or respect the value of your own word 
>enough, to leave on your own. In my opinion, this is just another 
>display of dishonesty.
>The thread's dead for me unless someone pokes me with stick.
></opinion> End of my opinion.