From: Matt Todd <chiology@...>
Date: 2006-09-22T07:35:38+09:00
Subject: Re: [OT] Rejected Ruby book ideas by O'Reilly

On 9/21/06, Paul Lutus <nospam@nosite.zzz> wrote:
> Right. And George Bush is not a religious leader. It is all in how people
> see things, not what they actually are. You are not paying attention to
> appearances.

The appearance that he has a job? Perhaps, sir, some people use work
email for work-related things, and, perhaps, our friend Daniel works
with Ruby, wherein participating on this list with is work email is
not a problem, and is in fact an asset to his job. Perhaps. Secondly,
what he does and does not do with his work email account is his
business, and not yours. Mr. Berger here is not the president of the
United States, and works for a private company. It is up to them to
tell him if he is doing something that is against their policy, not
yours.

> > And there was no criticism in my question.
>
> No one said or implied that there was. I called it a personal grievance --
> that seems accurate.

That, sir, is an assumption, and we know what that can (and usually
does) mean. It's simply ridiculous to assume that he's mad about a
book proposal that was rejected. He may, in fact, be planning
something else and this information is simply helpful to its
completion. Perhaps he's writing a book and wants to gauge whether it
would be accepted or not. Perhaps he's working on a service that will
'publish' via the web any books he finds interesting. Perhaps he's
just curious of the number of rejected or accepted-but-cancelled
proposals. Either way, that is up to him, and not for you to
criticize.

Go back to criticizing George Bush, you're doing a much better job at that.

Like my dad's mother used to say, "if you don't have anything nice to
say, don't say anything at all." And in this case, maybe it's
"constructive" and not "nice".

> > Please, don't try to guess why I'm asking - it won't work.
>
> Too late for that. You are far too transparent.

Things are decidedly not as transparent as they seem. To me, you are
transparently a dick. But, I don't know you, and that would be jumping
to conclusions, assuming, and misinterpreting your (presumably) good
intentions.

Like I said, thinks are decidedly not as they seem.

> And you are posting on matters having nothing remotely to do with your
> employment, on company time. Your argument that there is no conflict of
> interest is a double-edged sword -- it means you shouldn't be spending
> company time on it.

As I said above, perhaps he works with Ruby and he uses the support of
the community in his work? That is perfectly legit. I do it, and I'd
imagine a number of people do it. And even if this is not the case
(who knows?), it isn't my concern, nor is it yours, even as a QWest
client. Your concern is whether you get your services as you pay for
them. If you don't, then you complain to the person who can do
something about it.

Sorry for this being an off-topic response. I'll bring it a bit more
on topic by simply saying that I have not made a proposal yet, but I
am thinking about it. If I do, I will let you know how it works out.

Cheers, and peace.

M.T.