[conspire] conspire Digest, Vol 43, Issue 9

[Daniel Gimpelevich]

On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 17:02:42 -0800, Rick Moen wrote:

> Quoting Daniel Gimpelevich (daniel at gimpelevich.san-francisco.ca.us):
> 
>> [quoted text muted]
> 
> I know guys who own British sports cars.  Those are the guys who 
> have oil all over their driveways, their clutches disassembled on
> weekends, and the electrical harnesess by Lucas Electric ("Lucas, the
> prince of darkness") festooned all over their garages.
> 
> However, the world of automobiles is not parasitically encumbered by
> Austin-Healey and Lucas Electric preloads.  Guys who own MG-TCs don't
> try to shanghai me to help them, free of charge, debug their
> carburetors every week.  And corporate America isn't overloaded with
> consultants pimping for the British Leyland business monopoly.

Thus, the roles of Lucas Electric enthusiasts in the overall automobile
world aren't worthy of nearly as much attention from as many people. We
all have every right to be sick & tired of "debugging carburetors" on an
engine that needed a replacement when it was still under warranty and
didn't get it.

> Nor -- getting straight to the point -- do I have people like you
> telling me that bad attitudes like mine are why so few people share my
> liking for Saturns and Hondas.

Wow, way for me to miscommunicate! By "good" and "bad" I was referring to
"good for furthering the obsolescence of needing to debug carburetors" and
"bad for furthering the obsolescence of needing to debug carburetors."
Also, perhaps you didn't notice this, but why would I need to _hope_ that
positive perspectives of the fact that some people use Windows and some
don't may exist somewhere, unless I was also lumping myself in with those
who have negative perspectives?

> So, I have to wonder, are you just feeling cranky today, and trying to
> invent bizarre objections to other people's creations?  Because what you
> write (above) would seem strangely illogical as a comment on Don's page.

Whether or not I was cranky to begin with, this exchange has now made me
so. Like most things I say, the logic may not be immediately apparent, but
if one takes a close enough look, one can see what leads me to my
conclusions, no matter how wrong-headed they may be.

The exhortations on Don's page were a very positive force for the time
period in which they originated, and their substance is relatively
timeless, but the presentation strikes me as very "yesteryear" in 2006Q4.
Both the world of Linux and the rest of the world have passed it by.
Unfortunately, the rest of the world gets largely no indication of that,
which is why I find the page's popularity troubling.

And by "presentation" here, I am in no way referring to eye-candy, BTW.