DConf 2019: Shepherd's Pie Edition

Joakim dlang at joakim.fea.st
Sun Dec 23 10:05:40 UTC 2018


On Sunday, 23 December 2018 at 09:36:19 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
> On Sun, 2018-12-23 at 08:08 +0000, Joakim via 
> Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: […]
>> 
>> This questioning of iOS is so removed from reality that it 
>> makes me question if you are qualified to comment on this 
>> matter at all. iOS is the largest consumer software platform 
>> that is still growing, as it's estimated to bring in twice the 
>> revenue of google's Play store (that doesn't count other 
>> Android app stores, but they wouldn't make up the gap):
>
> Fair enough I have no interest in iOS at all. But you must 
> agree that you are clearly so far removed from the reality of 
> putting on technical conferences generally, that you are not 
> qualified to make assertions such as "conferences are a dead 
> form".
>
>> You could make various arguments for why they're still having 
>> less and less conferences, as my second link above listing 
>> them does. But to argue that iOS is not doing well is so 
>> ludicrous that it suggests you don't know much about these 
>> tech markets.
>
> Ludicrous is a good description of the entire situation in this 
> thread. You are making assertions as though they are facts, 
> working on the principle that if you shout long enough and loud 
> enough, people will stop disagreeing. A classic technique.
>
> […]
>
>> Yes, the proof is there: the conference is dying. You simply 
>> don't want to admit it.
>
> This is just assertions with no  data and thus is a religious 
> position. And I know conferences are thriving, you just do not 
> want to admit that.
>
>> This seems to be a religious issue for you, with your bizzare 
>> assertions above, so I'll stop engaging with you now.
>
> No it is you that has faith in the death of conferences, I am 
> involved in the reality of conferences being a relevant thing 
> that people want to attend. Just because you do not want to go 
> to conferences doesn't give you the right to try and stop 
> others from doing so.
>
> If you are going to stop ranting on this, I think that will 
> make a lot of people very happy. The idea of this email list is 
> to announce things, not debate things. Also on the debating 
> lists the idea is to have a collaborative not combative debate 
> about things. That includes if some people want to do something 
> they should be allowed to do it and not be harangued from the 
> wings. If people want to have a DConf, it is not your position 
> to tell them they cannot.

Your statements above are so ridiculous that they refute 
themselves, no need for me to do so. :)

As for your final ridiculous characterization that I'm 
"ranting/haranguing" people on this matter, I have only ever 
presented evidence and reasons for why the DConf format doesn't 
make sense. If that's "ranting" to you, it's clear you don't 
understand reasoned debate.

In this thread, all I've asked is why all those reasons were 
ignored, as Mike never gave any arguments for why those reasons 
aren't worth heeding. Walter's response suggests he never read my 
suggestions or reasons in the first place.

Nobody is telling "anyone they cannot," as though any of us have 
that power. Rather, I'm trying to figure out how this decision 
was made, in the face of all the reasons given and almost none 
given for maintaining the status quo.


More information about the Digitalmars-d-announce mailing list