hi,

"Mr" <mauriceraybaud [at] hotmail dot fr>> wrote:
> Good day ! Any information can help. So:
>
> Jr, I must start by telling you thanks again for trying to help me to get
> HGpovRay to compile last time, further than what appeared on the newsgroups
> since you did send me personal emails on my request to help me with files you
> had provided here. Though I still haven't managed to build hgpovray under
> windows is another issue. I felt mentioning this could help keeping the talk
> fair and not make you appear as a pure pressurizing ranter. Before hopefully
> closing your dispute and refocusing on topic.

thank you.  your staunch defence has cheered, and humbled, me.

> I must express my disagreement with this point: that both Chris Cason and Jim
> Henderson would owe us anything... In fact it's the opposite. The community owes
> *a lot* to them.

yes.  with hindsight, "owe" is too emotionally loaded, visceral, and "have an
obligation to" would have been a better, more accurate, term.

and I agree that the obligation cuts both ways, without "the management"
providing the software and the resources -- for decades -- our lives would have
been that much poorer.

> ...
> Meanwhile on developer-side, this value is certainly acknowledged. The natural
> feeling of the POV syntax in general and the way it was carefully extended for
> every new feature proves it constantly.
>
> SO, I am very glad that Chris Cason does not feel discouraged and is open to
> have such a debate and keep up with all this.

again agree.  I too am glad that, in spite of my .. lack of diplomacy, a debate
has begun.

> ...
> *About POV:
>
> Persistence of Vision became something worth defending for the common good of
> all the digital world:

+1.


regards, jr.

Post a reply to this message

hi,

Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> ...
> I'm not going to get involved with the debate with "Adorable Jim" and
> JR. Not my style.

still I think that your opinion(s) on the issues raised in the thread would be
worthwhile reading, for many here.


regards, jr.

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 27 Jul 2020 01:47:46 -0400, Mr wrote:

> About adorable Jim(s), now I feel really sorry and do apologize to Jim
> Henderson that I do not have the luck to know as well, and was in fact
> *thinking* about Jim Holsenback everytime I wrote Jim Henderson ! :-/ I
> am so sorry because he cannot be as adorable as Jim Holsenback... To
> me... Yet anyway ... :-)

No worries. :)  I do have involvement in other open source projects where 
I have contributed more (though my free time being what it is, I haven't 
had the opportunity to do much there either).

Jim
-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 27 Jul 2020 08:48:07 +0200, Thorsten wrote:

> On 26.07.2020 22:30, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Given the international nature of the community, GDPR may also be a
>> consideration.  That's one of the big challenges these days with data
>> protection laws.
> 
> Ah, I have to deal with this every day in my day job. It isn't all that
> bad unless you want to milk the users for their data. There is exactly
> one thing missing for the user registration on povray.org and that is a
> way for the user to delete the account created. The reason is that the
> personal email address is considered private data and it is required to
> register because an email gets sent to it.

Yeah, the company I work for deals with it a lot as well, as well as 
another open source community that I participate in.

There are also other local regulations that come into play, like the 
California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA).  With a lot of those laws, it 
doesn't matter if you are located there - if you have users/customers in 
those places, you're expected to follow the laws.

It's becoming a bit of a mess for small operators as a result.

> The other bigger issue of the website is, and I am sure Chris will
> address it once time allows, that it doesn't use HTTPS for the user data
> changes. Of course, nothing is gained by encryption given emails are
> public anyway, but still these days with browser vendors aggressively
> pushing encryption for marketing reasons, povray.org has little chance
> to escape this trend on the www site.

Yes, though there are ways of dealing with that now that are easier than 
they used to be - if anything, a 90-day LetsEncrypt certificate with an 
automated update is pretty easy to manage.

I run a couple of private sites that use authentication (my employer is 
in that business, so I play with the software in order to understand it 
better for my day job), and I use LE certificates for that, and have 
scripted the key pair rotation.

The certbot ACME client is pretty easy to use, and it does plug in with 
popular web servers pretty seamlessly.
-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw

Post a reply to this message

The way I see it is that this thread raises a few issues.

Marry, sir, you have shown a sense of entitlement that is not justified. 
Like many of the “I want it and I want it NOW, generation”.
Secondarily, there is the question of PovRay’s relevance to modern day 
computer graphics.
Sixth and lastly, there is a sense of secrecy about how PovRay operates.
Thirdly, there is the Pov community’s reaction.
And, to conclude, everyone is getting older and new blood has not been 
forthcoming.

I must say that’ privately, you told me, a couple of years ago that you 
would like to help out whichever way you could. But did not follow up 
with the contacts I found. I was just another user (the man on the 
Bourke Street tram) and why would I have anything to do with how Pov was 
run. But I digress.
Is PovRay relevant today? As a standard for computer generated graphics. 
Yes I think it is. As a working tool, not so much so. Chris and his crew 
are hampered by needing to make PovRay cross platform and on all 
machines. This amongst a few other restrictions means that a GPU cannot 
be used as each GPU manufacturer has different drivers and coding’s. 
That IMO is a killer. Maurice is right. Blender is jam packed with 
features and even Raytraces. Not just with meshes. Remember Rune’s 
particle system. A marvel of SDL but simple. It is knocked into a cocked 
hat by Blender. (No offence to Rune on my part.)
Ever since Uncle Ken was lured away to the darkside of photography the 
website has stagnated and information about what is happening is scarce. 
But no one came forward to take his place and this sort of work is, to 
me, a chore.
As to the future. I see Pov stagnating until all the old timers have 
transitioned. Then…



On 27/07/2020 11:33, jr wrote:
> hi,
> 
> Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
>> ...
>> I'm not going to get involved with the debate with "Adorable Jim" and
>> JR. Not my style.
> 
> still I think that your opinion(s) on the issues raised in the thread would be
> worthwhile reading, for many here.
> 
> 
> regards, jr.
> 


-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:

> Is PovRay relevant today? As a standard for computer generated graphics.
> Yes I think it is. As a working tool, not so much so. Chris and his crew
> are hampered by needing to make PovRay cross platform and on all
> machines. This amongst a few other restrictions means that a GPU cannot
> be used as each GPU manufacturer has different drivers and coding’s.
> That IMO is a killer.

Don't get me wrong, I was asking to not drop and to further develop the existing
+RTR feature. I never asked for GPU rendering because I, for one, fully trust
the current developers team strategy to avoid GPU glitches and rather bet on the
multiplication of threads available to CPUs. they can already be real time
enough.   I also love that someone was able to launch pov on Android, and this
is one very innovative possibility to look into. The CPU cycles control used to
render on the space station could be used to avoid overheating if there was a
way to implement it through POV itself rather than povwin. Thus POV would become
the first phone enabled 3D renderer! it already de facto isn't it? That would be
one of the side effects benefits of  "crossplatformness".

Post a reply to this message

hi,

Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> The way I see it is that this thread raises a few issues.
>
> Marry, sir, you have shown a sense of entitlement that is not justified.
> Like many of the “I want it and I want it NOW, generation”.

you too, huh?  I cannot see how to construe that ("sense of entitlement") from
my initial rant; it wasn't motivated by vengefulness, nor have I asked for
preferential treatment.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entitlement>

> ...
> And, to conclude, everyone is getting older and new blood has not been
> forthcoming.

that is one of the "ominous" signs which may have contributed to my .. upset.

> I must say that’ privately, you told me, a couple of years ago that you
> would like to help out whichever way you could. But did not follow up
> with the contacts I found. I was just another user (the man on the
> Bourke Street tram) and why would I have anything to do with how Pov was
> run. But I digress.

I would need to re-read the emails before commenting either way, but your memory
seems clear, so ok.

> ...
> As to the future. I see Pov stagnating until all the old timers have
> transitioned. Then…

since this is the .. "fate" I'm railing against, I hope your expectation will
not become reality.


regards, jr.

Post a reply to this message

"jr" <cre### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> I cannot see how to construe that ("sense of entitlement") from
> my initial rant; it wasn't motivated by vengefulness, nor have I asked for
> preferential treatment.

This is a pivotal point, and forms the crux of much of the misunderstandings
that occur.

I tried to express this before - poorly - because the messages and the language
used contribute to the muddled thought.

Persistence of Vision Raytracer, (the non-Franco-American "POV-Ray") exists - as
a project, a corporation, a Team, a website, a community, etc.

Since "POV-Ray" (NOT Chris Cason or any other individual) puts itself out there
on the web, and advertises itself as a living software project with developers
and GitHub releases and future versions, etc., That creates a certain impression
in the minds of reasonable people.  This leads to the formation of
not-unreasonable expectations.

No one is saying that anyone "OWES" anyone else anything.
Not like the IRS tells people that they "OWE" a cut of the money that they
earned (*), or the local government tells people that they "OWE" taxes on a
house that they bought, or that some imbecile tells me that I "OWE" anyone else
anything based upon race, or the conduct of individuals other than me (long
dead), or some wholly mythological "Social Contract" that no one can produce and
that I never signed.
No, not like that.

But when someone makes a representation "Hi, we're the POV-Team - we write and
develop POV-Ray..." _and doesn't expand on that or make any representations to
the contrary_ (We do this as a hobby, when and if we feel like it), then it's a
bit harsh to accuse someone of entitlement if, out of a completely reasonable
state of ignorance, they come into a discussion with certain expectations.

If someone told that they were going to meet me - they're not "obligated" to do
so - contractually, or legally - but barring extenuating circumstances, you'd
expect them to.
If someone told you that they'd tutor you in a class for free - and then showed
up and - wasn't qualified - wasn't interested - acted offended because you
expected then to help you --- that would be pretty weird and kind of
inappropriate.

So when people actively maintain a piece of software for 25+ years - looking
from the outside to be doing all of the things that a software company typically
does - one expects them to be doing those things.   Not in an entitled sense -
but just in a general, natural, wholly predictable "this is the way I expected
it to be" sense.

If someone maintained a brick-and-mortar storefront with signs and product and a
website and there was someone obviously behind the counter inside, and when you
walked in, they somehow took umbrage that you kind of expected them to provide
you with the basic level of service that they seemed to offer - there would be a
certain level of bewilderment.  "Open for business" carries a certain set of
connotations.

"Open for software development" carries - a certain set of connotations.

And if no one has taken the time to be open, upfront, and forthcoming about a
state of affairs that exists to the contrary, then it's a bit disingenuous - and
dances on the edge of "baiting" or "entrapment" of some kind.

I'm not going to speak for jr - he's perfectly capable of doing that himself.
But I would say that often people express things with personal language - they
may anthropomorphize - they may say "you" when they mean "people in general" -
when they are trying to communicate an idea.

My personal opinion is that the idea that I believe jr was trying to
communicate, is that "POV-Ray" writes and develops the POV-Ray software.  WHY?
If it was for their own personal use or for kicks - then why "put it out there"
on the web in the manner that it is?  The natural assumption is that --- wait
for it ---

they do it for the end users.
And that carries a set of connotations that are very hard for the average person
to avoid carrying with them as natural assumptions.

And the idea that I think needs to discussed (as it is) and clarified (Right out
there on the webpage - front and center) is that "it's a bit different than
that."  It's a loosely organized collection of people who contribute to its
progress if and when they are able to - if at all.
There's no hierarchy, there's no responsibility (at all), there's no money,
there's no obligation - to do anything.  At all.
POV-Ray could halt right where it is forever, or suddenly be wiped from the
Internet.

Now, people have different ways of communicating, which is based on their
imprinting, upbringing, social conditioning, brainwashing, socio-economic
factors, and even language.
I was told that Spain's and Mexico's Spanish are diametrically opposite - what's
polite in one "language" is heinously offensive in the other. (That's what
someone told me)
Some people may be shy, meek, lacking confidence, unsure of how to go about
things, etc.

I believe that people in the past have made some attempt at offering to help.
It was probably their expectation that someone from "The POV-Ray Team" would
follow up on that and more would happen.
That's obviously not the case.

To remedy that, and make it as easy as possible for people who have some
interest in helping - perhaps we can have a application form or special section
of the forums - or whatever, where a list of what is expected from them by The
People Who Run POV-Ray Behind The Curtain is provided, and they can divulge
relevant information such as experience, level of interest, available time to
work on things, willingness to learn new skills, etc.
That way it's clear, more inviting, more "official", and there's more of an
unambiguous record of their offer to help and the response.  Because no one's
going to just pick up the pile of source code, demystify it, and write some new
matrix math module or try to extricate the parser from the renderer - if they're
intimidated - if they don't get the sense that it's ok, and there will be
support, and there will be something at the end of it.


> > And, to conclude, everyone is getting older and new blood has not been
> > forthcoming.
>
> that is one of the "ominous" signs which may have contributed to my .. upset.

> > ...
> > As to the future. I see Pov stagnating until all the old timers have
> > transitioned.
>
> since this is the .. "fate" I'm railing against, I hope your expectation will
> not become reality.


Do not go gentle into that good night
Dylan Thomas - 1914-1953


Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,
And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way,
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight
Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

And you, my father, there on the sad height,
Curse, bless, me now with your fierce tears, I pray.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.


(*) Taxes are Stealing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2xm8fzQzM0

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 27 Jul 2020 19:39:39 -0400, Bald Eagle wrote:

> But when someone makes a representation "Hi, we're the POV-Team - we
> write and develop POV-Ray..." _and doesn't expand on that or make any
> representations to the contrary_ (We do this as a hobby, when and if we
> feel like it), then it's a bit harsh to accuse someone of entitlement
> if, out of a completely reasonable state of ignorance, they come into a
> discussion with certain expectations.

I think it's fair to say that those who started the discussion have been 
around long enough to know that it's a volunteer effort.  Indeed, the 
individual who started the entire discussion is one of the most prolific 
posters in these forums.

I think it's reasonable to expect that volunteers do with their time what 
they want to do with their time, and if that means releases are slower 
than one might expect, well, that's the nature of software developed by 
volunteers.  Those who want it to move faster can learn how to code (or 
contribute in other ways).

Further, to state that some individuals (such as myself) should not be 
"wasting time with a discussion" but instead get in there and work on the 
wiki (or whatever) is exactly a sense of "entitlement" - it's that 
entitlement of telling someone who volunteers their time what they should 
do with their free time.  Unless I ask someone for ideas about where I 
might help out, nobody has the right to tell a volunteer (or anyone who's 
officially involved in the project) how to spend their free time.

That is precisely where my objection to the entire thing comes from.  
That expectation that a member of the community who hasn't offered a 
specific way in which they may help (but who, in fairness, has said that 
they were willing to help) can make demands on the time of people who 
volunteer (time, money, resources, whatever) is unreasonable.

And left alone, those "demands" will be repeated.

So let's disabuse anyone of the notion right now that when people 
volunteer to do something, nobody has any right to expect anything from 
those doing the work.  Asking politely for what's happening is one 
thing.  Putting together a laundry list of complaints (and prefacing it 
with "those of a delicate disposition should stop reading now" indicates 
that the author clearly KNEW they were complaining to people they had no 
right to be complaining to).

I have no problem with questions.  I have a problem with rudeness and the 
presumption that one is entitled to anything where a project run by 
volunteers is concerned.  I have a problem with being told that my 
statements "lack veracity".  I have *never* been untruthful in my 
statements here - and I make a point of not "playing games" or being 
untruthful or misleading people.  Not that I expect the perpetrator of 
those statements to correct themselves - they've demonstrated that they 
don't care about correcting the record when they've made an error.

I'm happy to move past that part of the conversation, but I feel it 
important to make it clear what my issue is with this whole thing - as 
someone who has, on occasion, felt motivated to pitch in in what ways I 
am able to (and who is entirely willing to do it again, time permitting).

-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:

> I think it's fair to say that those who started the discussion have been
> around long enough to know that it's a volunteer effort.

I think it's fair to say that the _nature_ of that "volunteering" may not be,
and apparently isn't clear.
It's murky and ambiguous - and that leads to assumptions about things on either
side.  "Those in the know" and "those that aren't".
If someone volunteers to do work at a charity or something like that, but when
they're there they play on their cell phone, stand outside smoking, watching TV,
or doing anything BUT what they putatively volunteered for...  and then when one
of the recipients shows up looking for the product of the charitable effort [or
lack thereof] --- I think there is going to be some friction.
There's no hard and fast "deserving" and "owing" - but the charity was
established _for the purpose of doing charity work_.
So when the person "involved with the charity" isn't doing any charitable work -
the typical minds wonders 'what they are doing there?" and WHY.

I mean, there's not going to be a bench warrant issued for clipka or anyone else
who's left, but it's easy to post a one liner saying that you won't be back for
a while - or ever.  If someone doesn't call in to he charity they volunteer at,
is it _unreasonable_ for someone to call them and ask why they didn't show up,
if they'll be back, etc?

My point is that _whatever_ goes on HERE is different than that, and in order to
make it clear and avoid any future misunderstandings by anyone about anything,
that point should be clarified and posted at the entryway, and distributed with
the Read Me.
That's my suggestion.

> Indeed, the
> individual who started the entire discussion is one of the most prolific
> posters in these forums.

jr
(he is?)

> I think it's reasonable to expect that volunteers do with their time what
> they want to do with their time, and if that means releases are slower
> than one might expect, well, that's the nature of software developed by
> volunteers.

It is.  The point is that it's ALSO reasonable for many of the 10 billion people
on this planet to expect that the volunteer will at some point be doing what
they volunteered to do.  And I specifically mean that not in a selfish and
entitled "expect"  way, but from a "well what the heck is going on, then" way.

Perhaps think, believe, suppose, assume, trust, imagine, reckon, forecast,
calculate, presume, foresee, conjecture, surmise, think likely, anticipate, look
forward to, predict, envisage, await, hope for, contemplate, look ahead to,
want, wish, hope for, and possibly even count on or rely upon would be more to
your personal liking.


I mean, I read virtually every post, every day, and have for --- 7 years now?
I answer questions, research documentation, find and fix source code bugs, make
and fix objects and textures for people, and even sometimes write entire scene
files with includes and macros.
But was it apparent to me that the only person left is Chris Cason?  No.
Certainly I had assumed that there was this "list" of people that conducted
official POV-Ray business and knew the secret handshake and did all of the
things that magically happen on GitHub and FlySpray and the website and other
places - M. Grimbert, Mr. Pokorny, the now vanished C. Lipka, ...
It simply comes as a surprise when people involved mention that "Oh, we haven't
heard from THAT guy for 2, 5, 10 years...."

> Those who want it to move faster can learn how to code (or
> contribute in other ways).

They can... But as I pointed out, it's not as simple as that, especially when
you're "on the outside" and "in the dark".
"If you don't like it here, leave."
"If you don't speak [C++], go back to [wherever you came from."
Like that?

Suppose that Stephen takes it upon himself to volunteer to do some amazing mesh
work with all the breast-jiggle that anyone could ever hope to see, and every
facet of his project is POV-Ray this and POV-Ray that....
I'm sure some special little snowflake will be ALL OVER him about what he can
and cannot do.
Now maybe he CAN, and there's jack that anyone can do about it.
But I'm proposing that your average person might not be so assertive in their
grabbing what they perceive is someone else's bull by the horns and leading it
off to a livestock show where they show it off.

Can I just go ahead and make some social media accounts under "POV-Ray"?  Do _I_
decide what content to post?  Am I now affiliated with POV-Ray because I say so?
Do I now speak on behalf of POV-Ray, because I feel like it? Can I post other
people's work with whatever attributions may exist, so that people can see what
POV-Ray can do?
I mean, on the one hand, there are people who get their panties all in a twist,
wring their hands, and clutch their pearls over "intellectual property rights"
and licenses, concerning macros and include files written by people that no one
hears from anymore and no one can even be certain if they're even still alive.
So on the other hand, without someone, somewhere, "officially" associated with
the POV-Ray project, team, company, etc communicating with them in some way to
clarify things, most people are going to experience a bit of apprehension and
timidity.
And WHO do they contact?  It's not like there's a list of email addresses
prominently posted anywhere.


> Further, to state that some individuals (such as myself) should not be
> "wasting time with a discussion" but instead get in there and work on the
> wiki (or whatever)

This does not seem materially different from you telling someone else that they
should learn to code or do something productive.

> is exactly a sense of "entitlement" - it's that
> entitlement of telling someone who volunteers their time what they should
> do with their free time.

But they're NOT telling you what to do with your free time.   They're looking
at/to you as a volunteer and commenting on what they think would be best for you
to do _when you're volunteering_.
Everyone has an opinion.  Sometimes you even get to hear about them.
In or out.  Don't stand in the doorway - you're letting the flies in.

> Unless I ask someone for ideas about where I
> might help out, nobody has the right to tell a volunteer (or anyone who's
> officially involved in the project) how to spend their free time.

People have a Right to say whatever they want.   You have a Right to ignore
them, be offended, feel threatened, to do something else, to disagree with them,
throw a tantrum, or whatever.  You don't have the authority to muzzle anyone.
People always try to coerce others into silence, especially when it's by proxy.



> That is precisely where my objection to the entire thing comes from.
> That expectation that a member of the community who hasn't offered a
> specific way in which they may help (but who, in fairness, has said that
> they were willing to help) can make demands on the time of people who
> volunteer (time, money, resources, whatever) is unreasonable.

I dislike much of the overly pedantic fuckery on some of the interweb sites to
the point where it's nearly intolerable. Normal people would take up the offer
and continue a colloquial conversation by suggesting what they _could_ do, or
asking what they think they might be able to help with or what their experience
is.
And he's not making _demands_.  And really, who cares if he was.
He's popping a gasket because everything has seemingly ground to a halt, and
there was an absence of information as to how things worked and why.

> And left alone, those "demands" will be repeated.

"This needs to be fixed."
It could be interpreted as a "demand" - but it's fundamentally an assertive
observation.
If everyone who walked into a charity tripped over the threshold of the entry
door and then finally someone said something about it, I'm _pretty sure_ that
the response wouldn't be "Who let YOU in, and what did you do to offer to fix
it?  Why don't you go learn some carpentry and fix it yourself?  Can't you see
this is a charity, staffed with volunteers? Maybe you should just go away."

> So let's disabuse anyone of the notion right now that when people
> volunteer to do something, nobody has any right to expect anything from
> those doing the work.

People have a Right to expect whatever they want - and to be disappointed.

> Asking politely for what's happening is one
> thing.  Putting together a laundry list of complaints (and prefacing it
> with "those of a delicate disposition should stop reading now" indicates
> that the author clearly KNEW they were complaining to people they had no
> right to be complaining to).

In general, this is preferably the way things ought to happen.
But anyone who has lived out in real world knows that sometimes people are
asleep, in their own little worlds, and ignoring more than they should.
And in order for anything to happen, they need to Make A Big Noise and shake
people out of the rut.
Oh well.
It seems that the rude customer making a scene has caused the Management to look
at things with fresh eyes, and I'm quite happy that this scandalous outburst has
gotten people to chime in and TALK and exchange information and suggestions, and
ideas, and maybe even inspire new purpose.   Hungry people slaughter sacred
cows.


The shell cracks, its insides come out and everything changes. To someone who

Cynthia Occelli

> I have no problem with questions.  I have a problem with rudeness and the
> presumption that one is entitled to anything where a project run by
> volunteers is concerned.

vide supra.

> I have a problem with being told that my
> statements "lack veracity".  I have *never* been untruthful in my
> statements here - and I make a point of not "playing games" or being
> untruthful or misleading people.

I suppose I have no real option other than to accept that at face value.

> Not that I expect the perpetrator of
> those statements to correct themselves - they've demonstrated that they
> don't care about correcting the record when they've made an error.

Third party dispute.  Not my circus.  Not my monkeys.

> I'm happy to move past that part of the conversation, but I feel it
> important to make it clear what my issue is with this whole thing - as
> someone who has, on occasion, felt motivated to pitch in in what ways I
> am able to (and who is entirely willing to do it again, time permitting).

And so you have.
Just curious:
How much of your life have you allowed jr to take up because "someone [him] on
the Internet was WRONG!!" ?

Post a reply to this message