Subject: Re: arch advocates
From: Ralph Corderoy <>
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 22:49:14 +0100


> > But as I've said (too) many times, our my personal policy (and to a
> > large extent our product policy) is to ignore what authors tell us
> > about their software and listen only to what users say.  
> We could do your job with an eliza program, then.  Turn over your
> salary to some AI grad students, please.

Will you just shut up for a minute.  Stop spamming all these lists with
your `arch is great, the whole world must see that, give me what I
deserve' spiel.

It doesn't matter whether arch is good or not.  You attitude will stop
you succeeding.  Just look at that arrogant reply to Michael Tiemann
above, a guy you're trying to persuade to do you a favour, even though
you're trying to tell him you're doing him a big one.

You said earlier about social connections playing a role in business
success.  Well, they do.  A major one being word of mouth between
*users*.  I think Michael's right to say they should and do listen to
what their users say.  You need to get users using arch and telling
their pals and colleagues how good it is.  (Why do you think Larry McVoy
tries so hard with BitKeeper to encourage use on new projects?  And it's
working, despite the licence issue.)  What you don't need are users
saying `arch is nice, but that Tom Lord guy is such a ...'.  Look at
what happened with Smoothwall and the IPCop fork for an example of this.

This isn't the first time people, not me, have complained about the way
you come across on these lists.  If you think that isn't how you mean to
come across then maybe this medium and you don't get on.  What about
trying to grab someone like Michael at a trade show in the near future
instead.  Perhaps you're better face-to-face.  (Michael, you've been
warned, step up security  ;-)

Sorry if this comes across as a bit harsh, but if arch is as good as you
think, it's annoying to see you shooting it in both feet.