Schizophrenic Robert Martin exposed at http://www.netscum.net/martinr0.html

lucifer Anonymous Remailer

unread,

Jun 1, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/1/97

to

Netscum Robert C. Martin, rma...@oma.com, object-disoriented potty
trainer, lame flamer, writes pathetic columns

Certainly one of the most insulting activities to readers of use net
articles is to respond to one's own articles which is done constantly by
the demonstrable schizophrenic and comp.object-idiot Robert C. Martin of
Object Mentor, Object Oriented Design, 14619 N Somerset Cr, Green Oaks,
IL 60048, Tel: (847) 918-1004, Fax: (847) 918-1023.

Schizophrenic Robert C. Martin talks to Schizophrenic Robert C. Martin:

From: rma...@oma.com (Robert C. Martin)
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: Re: How to merge OO programming style and RDBMS?
Organization: Object Mentor Inc.
Lines:30
Message-ID: <rmartin-0105...@pool5-050.wwa.com>
References: <01bc50ba$ca7a8ee0$97a6edc2@my-computer>
<rmartin-2904...@poo11-005.wwa.com>
<slrn5mdvrq...@lyapunov.ucsd.edu>
NNTP-Posting Host: pool5-050.wwa.com

In article <slrn5mdvrq...@lyapunov.ucsd.edu>,
ken...@nospam.lyapunov.ucsd.edu wrote:

>
> What I see as a potent question is this:
>
> How do we design 'conventional databases' in a way which offers
> incremental adaptability and control of dependency in the same way
> that object-oriented languages [sic] do for algorithmic processes.
>
> In other words, take a big motivation for object-oriented programming,
> and try it on database technology.

I agree, this is a potent question.

One simple minded solution is the use of hierarchies of name-value pairs.
These structures, very much like directories, that are self describing.
You can walk their internal structure without knowing it in advance.

This does not solve the problem you pose above, but it does have some of
the
dependency management features. Perhaps it is a step along the way.

"One of the great commandments of science is:
'Mistrust arguments from authority.'" -- Carl Sagan

RCM is responding to Mat Kennel (MKT for mental kludges), a well known
mouth breather and abuser of government resources (q.v.).

MKT question is idiotic from the start because "conventional databases"
mean nothing, being totally non specific: replace conventional databases
with conventional telephone book lists or grocery lists.

MKT juxtaposed rephrase of applying one technology to another is
meaningless because the second technology (object oriented whatever) was
already used to develop the first technology (database technology) from
day one. What Kennel completely misses, due to being educated beyond
his intelligence, is the fact that renaming the second technology
(previously knows as modular, procedural programming) to something else
(object oriented whatever) does not make the second technology anything
new to apply to the first technology (database technology), which
existed in the first place due to the second technology (modular,
procedural programming).

The stage being set, RCM reply is even more idiotic because it attempts
to make the non sequitur into a valid argument in this way.

RCM agrees it is an important question, proposes one "simple minded
solution", then states it "does not solve the problem you posed" at all.
In mental health circles, that is knows as SCHIZOPHRENIC reasoning.

RCM them compounds his schizophrenic predicament in the following
article by responding to himself (the voices in RCM's head are again
talking back to the voices in RCM's head):

From: rma...@oma.com (Robert C. Martin)
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: Re: How to merge OO programming style and RDBMS?
Date: Thu, 012 May 1997 13:28:12 -600
Organization: Object Mentor Inc.
Lines:45
Message-ID: <rmartin-0105...@pool14-020.wwa.com>
References: <5kaeqt$fev$1...@news2.digex.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: poo14-020.wwa.com

In article <5kaeqt$fev$1...@news2.digex.net>, e...@access1.digex.net (Ell)
wrote:
> Robert C. Martin (rma...@oma.com) wrote:
> : In article <336749A2...@nospan-execpc.com>, Kevin Klein
> : <kkl...@nospam-execpc.com> wrote:
> :
> : > Robert C. Martin wrote:
> : >
> : > > The rules for RDBs (Codd's normal forms) are quite restrictive.
> : > > Most
> : > > classes don't adhere to them. This is because classes are not =
used
> : > > primarily
> : > > to support queries. Classes are not used primarily as =
repositories
> : > > for data.
> : > > Rather, classes are repositories of behavior!
>
> : > But if the purpose of your database is to support queries, then you
> : > can't ignore Codd. If you don't play some heed to him during class
> : > design time, then you'll just have to revisit the issue later.
>
> : Agreed. You missed my point. The structure of the classes in the
> : *application* need not adhere to normal forms. However databases
> : should
> : be designed with Codd in mind. This is one of he mismatches between
> : databases (whether OO or RDB or what have you) and applications. =
They
> : use different structuring rules.
>
> I can see using Codd for rdb's, but not oodb's. How does one apply =
Codd
> to the storage of objects in an oodb? There are no tables to =
normalize.
> And if an object has eg. a repeating group in its members how does Codd
> enter into how that should be handled? That is a question of object
> design not relational normalization, as I see it.

I agree that NF1 [normal form 1] is probably not appropriate to OODBs.
After all, we want to store objects which have internal structure. =
However
NF2 and NF3 reasonable in an OODB. That is, the members of an object
should depend upon that object and upon no other object...

"One of the great commandments of science is:
'Mistrust arguments from authority.'" -- Carl Sagan

The progression of the voices in RCM head above proceeds as follows.

The voices in RCM head demonstrate clueless (nil) understanding of
Codd's normal forms, the history of relational database technology, and
the perfect mathematical basis of relational database technology.

A kind reader, unaware of what RCM really is, points out RCM is
mistaken. (To those aware of RCM schizophrenic logic, RCM is not
mistaken but again simply wasting everyone's time.)

The voices in RCM head say "Agreed", that is the voices in RCM head
agree that the voices in RCM head are mistaken about normal forms. The
voices in RCM head then say they don't agree anymore because the kind
reader really misunderstood what the voices in RCM head were saying to
themselves. The voices in RCM head then invoke and hide behind the
definition of classes, of which the voices have legion definitions. Now
replace the word "classes" as used by the voices in RCM head with the
pure, correct, and universally accepted definition that classes are
"collections of objects". Once done, the argument of the voices in RCM
head's that the kind reader missed the point is proven false. What
follows is that the kind reader wasted his time in correcting the voices
in RCM head, and Usenet readers of RCM trash have again wasted their
time.

Then a further chorus of schizophrenic voices in Ell(i)'s head chime in
with the argument restated by the voices in RCM head which "agree that
NF1 is probably not appropriate to OODBs".

The voices in RCM head then respond to themselves, starting the
schizophrenic interchange all over again, that "NF2 and NF3 are
reasonable in an OODB".

The voices in RCM's head once again contradict themselves and show
clueless understanding for the simple fact that because NF3 is
predicated on NF2 and because NF2 is predicated on NF1, then NF2 and NF3
are predicated on the previous state of NF1 which the voices in RCM's
head have declared as "probably not appropriate".

The final schizophrenic statement of the voices in RCM head is "the
members of an object should depend upon that object and upon no other
object..." which contradicts itself in this way. An object is the most
basic component of an object-oriented system, an object is supposed to
exhibit well-defined behavior in response to a number of applicable
operations, and an object is also called a class instance (from the BON
book, p 399). Therefore it is impossible for an object to have
"members", and it is impossible for an object to "depend upon that
object and upon no other object".

Perhaps the arch-schizophrenic statement of this series of the voices in
RCM's head talking to the voices in RCM's head is RCM quotation
attributed to the late homosexual Carl Sagan:

"One of the great commandments of science is:
; 'Mistrust arguments from authority.'" -- Carl Sagan

because a anyone who knew how Sagan operated as a dictatorial lecturer
in the classroom, a dictatorial deliverer of partially plagiarized
papers at conferences, and the dictatorial head of his family, Sagan's
statement is oxymoronic on its face and hypocritical and two-faced in
its execution.

Send your thank you notes, and letters of condolence, to the voices in
RCM's head for wasting your time in trashy schizophrenic articles on
comp.object.

Martin repeatedly demonstrates his ignorance of software engineering and
other computer-related disciplines:

Subject: Re: C++ vs Smalltalk
From: "Robert C. Martin" <rma...@oma.com>
Date: 1995/05/29
Message-Id: <3qdid9$6...@news.wwa.com>
References: <3q8fug$4vk$1...@mhadf.production.compuserve.com> <3q8gqe$e...@natasha.rmii.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: Object Mentor Associates
X-Url: news:3q8gqe$e...@natasha.rmii.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.object
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)

cja...@cec-services.com (Colin James III (The Rt Rev'd)) wrote:
>John Thornby <71022...@CompuServe.COM> wrote with possible
>deletions:
>
>>Smalltalk programmers do not seem to have the same applications
>>development maturity, discipline or experience that C++
>>programmers have. It is much easier to find skilled C++
>>developers that are used to working in a team environment with
>>skills that go beyond developing for standalone desktop
>>applications. Obviously, there are pockets of large scale
>>professional development in Smalltalk, but they are few.
>
>This is entirely a matter of training.
>
>Headhunter_s now tell me they see C/C++ leveled off and great demand
>for SmallTalk.

This is , of course, Hearsay. Does anybody have any actual statistics?

>Please expound how a C/C++ programmer could possibly be disciplined,
>especially those who enjoy programming in C !

Again, the language that an engineer uses has very little bearing
on his discipline or efficacy. There are good and bad engineers using
all languages, and I would guess that the ratios are unbiased with
respect to language.

Martin displays his outright stupiduty:

Subject: Re: Rehosting from mainframe using OOPS on UNIX
From: "Robert C. Martin" <rma...@oma.com>
Date: 1995/05/31
Message-Id: <3qi64f$m...@news.wwa.com>
References: <3qe6rh$2...@freenet.vcu.edu> <3qf4k5$f...@natasha.rmii.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: Object Mentor Associates
X-Url: news:3qf4k5$f...@natasha.rmii.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.object
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)

cja...@cec-services.com (Colin James III (The Rt Rev'd)) wrote:

>Hence, the main part of their problem was using C++, which forced bad
>design decisions.

Claiming that a computer langauge (like C++) forces bad design decisions,
is rather like claiming that a human language (like English) forces bad
literary design.

C++ does not force anyone into making bad design decisions. C++ allows
designs to be implemented. Specifically, is supports the implementation
of object oriented designs, and it does so rather well.

Martin never misses an opportunity to push his books, even while flaming:

Subject: Re: The Principles of OOD
From: "Robert C. Martin" <rma...@oma.com>
Date: 1995/06/07
Message-Id: <3r3bso$7...@news.wwa.com>
References: <1995Jun6....@rcmcon.com> <3r0ond$c...@natasha.rmii.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: Object Mentor Associates
X-Url: news:3r0ond$c...@natasha.rmii.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.object
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)

cja...@cec-services.com (Colin James III (The Rt Rev'd)) wrote:
>rma...@rcmcon.com (Robert Martin) wrote with possible deletions:
>
>>I am in the midst of working on my next book: "The Principles and Patterns
>>of Object Oriented Design". As part of that exercize, I have been compiling
>>a set of principles, some of which I posted to comp.object several months
>>back. They are included at the end of this posting.
>
>What you write about here in this newsgroup is so far off base from
>what others do in practice in the mainstream of successful object
>technology, in my opinion, that your next book would not be useful at
>all to me -- remember, I don't waste my time with fad languages such
>as C or C++ .... .

It is perfectly all right with me if you don't read my books, as long
as you then refrain from commenting on them.
It is also quite alright if you wish to avoid C and C++. Call them
'fads' if you wish, although that is the same word that the conservative
barber on that silly TV commercial used to describe color TV.

As for the applicability of the things I write about, and whether they
are "off base". I will let my readers be the judge of that.

>No where that I have read do you emphasize reusability: no where!

Then I suggest that you read my postings and my book. I talk about
reusability rather extensively. Also, you and I recently had a
disagreement on the net where I posted some statistics on the
reuse that I, my associates, and my clients are achieving with
a significant framework library that we wrote. So, I don't think
your comment is particularily accurate.

>No where have I read that you/your company have:
>1. Produced a non-trivial class library;

Where were you expecting to read this? My company is just a little 6
person group of OO experts. We train and consult, and develop C++
frameworks and applications for major corporations around the world.
But we are not written up in Infoweek or the Wall Street Journal. So
it doesn't surprise me that you haven't read anything about us.

To answer your indirect charge however, we have produced a rather
significant framework in C++ which is being used by us, and our
clients to develop C++ applications.
>
>2. Had such a class library reused successfully by strangers.

Since we are a small company, we have not had hundreds of reusers.
Howver, people unfamiliar with the design of our framework
have successfully reused it.

I am not claiming perfection, I am only claiming that we have
achieved some good results.

>I am not talking about templates or frameworks; I am talkiing about
>real, true class libraries of reusable software components which are
>_useful_ and _not_trivial_.

Well, we find the 60,000+ lines of code in our Framework both significant
and non-trivial. Perhaps that is a small number to some people. But
we are proud of it.

>The two items above are generally considered to be what qualifies one
>as an "expert" in OT.

I am not sure that I acknowledge your right to define the
criteria for expertise. However by your system, we are experts.

>Please do not take these comments personally (I don't know you).

I take them as an attempt to challenge my ability
to author a book on OO.
I said that I was writing another book, and you
proceeded to state, publicly, that my writings were "far off base".
Then you made statements that brought my qualifications to write
such a book into question.

I do not question your right to challenge me. In fact, I welcome
such challenges. Fire away.

Control freak Martin outlines his plans for censorship:

Subject: Re: C++: RFD Modification Request.
From: "Robert C. Martin" <rma...@oma.com>
Date: 1995/10/28
Message-Id: <46uajd$f...@kirin.wwa.com>
References: <46jnl7$3...@auriga.galacta.demon.co.uk> <KANZE.95O...@slsv7xt.lts.sel.alcatel.de> <46nscr$9...@auriga.galacta.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: Object Mentor Associates
X-Url: news:46nscr$9...@auriga.galacta.demon.co.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: news.groups,comp.lang.c++
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (X11; I; SunOS 5.3 sun4m)

rar...@galacta.demon.co.uk (Dr. Rich Artym) wrote:
>If c.l.c++.moderated restricted itself to discussions about concepts
>and theory and general C++ facilities then I wouldn't be voicing such
>strong objections, since it would indeed be leaving open the way for
>new subgroups to be formed. The current proposal does NOT do that,
>however, by the extremely wide terms of its charter. Drop questions
>and answers and FAQs and other such things and it would be different.
>At present, you are specifically hardwiring in the impossibility of
>creating some of the more obvious new subgroups, by your very charter.
>Any subsequent RFD would almost inevitably conflict with .moderated.

We (the moderators of the proposed group) have been working on this very issue.
Specifically, we are in the midst of writing the policy document that
describes the policy under which articles will be rejected from
comp.lang.c++.moderated. For the most part, any question that would more
normally be in a subgroup of comp.lang.c++ would likely be rejected. The
policy states that only articles related to C++ development and management
are allowable. Moreover it disallows any discussion of platform, environment,
or third-party products.

We will be making this document available as soon as it is ready, but I think
that you will find that it meets the bulk of your needs.

A comment however. Even if there is some overlap between other potential
groups and comp.lang.c++.moderated, it will not be the end of the world.
We will all manage as best we can. The perfect classification structure
does not exist, so such overlap will always be present no matter what we do.

Rest assured, however, that the moderators of comp.lang.c++.moderated do
not want to create a funnel that will attract all the peripheral dicsussions
into their group.

More lame flames from Martin:

Subject: Re: Shlaer & Mellor: automatic code generation
From: rma...@oma.com (Robert C. Martin)
Date: 1995/11/29
Message-Id: <RMARTIN.95...@rcm.oma.com>
References: <nstn0226-061...@ottawa-ts-63.nstn.ca>
Organization: Object Mentor
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng,comp.object

In article <49cmo3$7...@natasha.rmii.com> cja...@cec-services.com (Colin James III (The Rt Rev'd)) writes:

While I do not choose to argue with Robert Martin (or his apparent
protege Elliott Coates) or Grady Booch in any medium, preferring to
give them the last word in _any_ discussion, it is clear to me from
their legion SIGS articles and posts that their definitions are not
necessarily based on real-life experiences stores of successful
software projects.

I cannot speak for Elliott, who is by no means my protege, but my
writings come from a quarter of a century of experience. During that
time I have been a software engineer, a software architect, a manager
of software engineers, and the president of a successful and growing
software consulting firm.

I do not take your implication lightly. It is a challenge to my
integrity and it must be confronted and dealt with. Therefore, I
challenge you to quote from any of my articles or posts some issue
that makes is to "clear" to you that my "definitions are not
necessarily based on real-life experiences". If you do, then I will
answer you as best I can. If you do not, then it will be clear to
all present that you were just blowing smoke for some self-serving
purpose.

I await your convenience.

Martin flames Bertrand Meyer:

Subject: Re: Beware of "C" Hackers -- A rebuttal to Bertrand Meyer
From: rma...@oma.com (Robert C. Martin)
Date: 1996/03/18
Message-Id: <RMARTIN.96...@rcm.oma.com>
References: <1995Jul3.0...@rcmcon.com> <3taaha$p...@ixnews3.ix.netcom.com>
Organization: Object Mentor
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.c,comp.object,comp.software-eng

In article <4idged...@keats.ugrad.cs.ubc.ca> c2a...@ugrad.cs.ubc.ca (Kazimir Kylheku) writes:

This thread is full of clueless, idiotic postings that are devoid
of concrete examples, the excerpt from this Bertrand character's
book is no exception. He is clearly a clueless twit who should not
be published.

This is hardly true. Dr. Meyer has written a number of *excellent* books
that should be on the reading list of anyone who is a student of
software engineering. Do not judge an author by the fanaticism of his
desciples.

Dr. Meyer has a *thing* about C. I don't quite understand why. I wrote the
rebuttal that started this thread several months back, because Dr. Meyer made
a statement that I strongly disagreed with. However, my indictment of his
statement was not also an indictment of the man or his work.

Martin apologizes for his stupidty and bad spelling:

Subject: Re: Subject: Architecture the Most Important Thing?
From: rma...@oma.com (Robert C. Martin)
Date: 1996/07/15
Message-Id: <rmartin-1507...@vh1-006.wwa.com>
References: <31DE8A...@oma.com> <4rm9tl$m...@news4.digex.net> <rmartin-0807...@vh1-025.wwa.com> <4rtpu8$5...@news3.digex.net> <rmartin-1007...@vh1-050.wwa.com> <4s3a3r$m...@sloth.swcp.com> <4s4agm$9...@news3.digex.net> <4s4c7v$9...@news3.digex.net>
Organization: Object Mentor Inc.
Newsgroups: comp.object

In article <4s4c7v$9...@news3.digex.net>, e...@access1.digex.net (Ell) wrote:

> [BTW, it was he who first time and time again refused to spell my name
> properly. I have raised the issue with him at least once, and tried to
> give him an out by occasionally spelling his correctly throughout my
> articles. Yet he refuses spell mine correctly.]

Elliott. My frequent mispelling of your name (Elliot instead of Elliott)
has been unintentional; albeit careless. I apologize for my lack of attention
with respect to this issue. Nobody likes to have their name mispelled.

I don't recall you brining it up to me in the past; however, it might have
been about the same time that Colin James also informed me that I was
repeatedly spelling his name wrong. So perhaps I got confused.

Again, I apologize, I will endeavor to spell your name correctly in future.

"One of the great commandments of science is:
'Mistrust arguments from authority.'" -- Carl Sagan

Shameful inappropriate ad by Robert C. Martin:

Path: ...!news2.planetc.com!news.planetc.com!leto.ou.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.wwa.com!not-for-mail
From: "Robert C. Martin" <rma...@oma.com>
Newsgroups: comp.object,comp.lang.c++
Subject: New Public UML and Patterns courses in Houston and Chicago
Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 23:03:24 -0500
Organization: Object Mentor Inc.
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <3383C58C...@oma.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pool8-038.wwa.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dus-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.0b4 [en] (Win95; I)
To: ot...@rational.com
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)

The public classes that we held in Chicago this Spring were quite=20
successful. Therefore we have decided to schedule a few more. =20
See our website for more details.

In Houston:
8-25-97: First Principles of OOAD with UML
9-22-97: Advanced OOAD and Design Patterns.

In Chicago:
10-20-97: First Principles of OOAD with UML
11-10-97: Advanced OOAD and Design Patterns.

"One of the great commandments of science is:
'Mistrust arguments from authority.'" -- Carl Sagan

Robert C. Martin

unread,

Jun 1, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/1/97

to

Wow! The DEVIL himself -- Lucifer, that bright shining light who fell
from heaven after the archangels kicked his butt -- has posted a
much better version of the "Schizophrenic Robert Martin" article.

I think this article is much better than the last one. Don't you Bob?
Yes, Bob, I do. It accentuates the counterpoint of the underlying
metaphor beautifully. Yes, Bob, I agree. It is a cunning yet
saucy little number; impudent and bold. Quite refreshing after a
big steak or a roast pheasant.

lucifer Anonymous Remailer wrote:
>
> Schizophrenic Robert Martin exposed at http://www.netscum.net/martinr0.html

--

Robert C. Martin

unread,

Jun 1, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/1/97

to

Wow! The DEVIL himself -- Lucifer, that bright shining light who fell
from heaven after the archangels kicked his butt -- has posted a
much better version of the "Schizophrenic Robert Martin" article.

I think this article is much better than the last one. Don't you Bob?
Yes, Bob, I do. It accentuates the counterpoint of the underlying
metaphor beautifully. Yes, Bob, I agree. It is a cunning yet
saucy little number; impudent and bold. Quite refreshing after a
big steak or a roast pheasant.

lucifer Anonymous Remailer wrote:
>
> Schizophrenic Robert Martin exposed at http://www.netscum.net/martinr0.html

--

L. M. Rappaport

unread,

Jun 1, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/1/97

to

"Robert C. Martin" <rma...@oma.com> wrote (with possible editing):

>Wow! The DEVIL himself -- Lucifer, that bright shining light who fell
>from heaven after the archangels kicked his butt -- has posted a
>much better version of the "Schizophrenic Robert Martin" article.

Bob and Bob,

Some guys have all the luck. Maybe if I work really hard, some fine
day, I too can get trashed. :-)

Larry
--
ra...@lmr.com

Robert C. Martin

unread,

Jun 1, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/1/97

to

Yes, our son, it could happen. With work, hard work, and a lot
of practice, you too could one day be scum.

lucifer Anonymous Remailer

unread,

Jun 3, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/3/97

to

Schizophrenic Robert Martin exposed at http://www.netscum.net/martinr0.html

Netscum Robert C. Martin, rma...@oma.com, object-disoriented potty

--

"One of the great commandments of science is:
'Mistrust arguments from authority.'" -- Carl Sagan

--

"One of the great commandments of science is:
'Mistrust arguments from authority.'" -- Carl Sagan

"One of the great commandments of science is:

; 'Mistrust arguments from authority.'" -- Carl Sagan

because a anyone who knew how Sagan operated as a dictatorial lecturer

Robert C. Martin | Design Consulting | Training courses offered:

I await your convenience.

Martin flames Bertrand Meyer:

14619 N. Somerset Cr| Tel: (847) 918-1004 | Mgt. Overview of OOT

Green Oaks IL 60048 | Fax: (847) 918-1023 | http://www.oma.com

Martin apologizes for his stupidty and bad spelling:

Subject: Re: Subject: Architecture the Most Important Thing?
From: rma...@oma.com (Robert C. Martin)
Date: 1996/07/15
Message-Id: <rmartin-1507...@vh1-006.wwa.com>
References: <31DE8A...@oma.com> <4rm9tl$m...@news4.digex.net> <rmartin-0807...@vh1-025.wwa.com> <4rtpu8$5...@news3.digex.net> <rmartin-1007...@vh1-050.wwa.com> <4s3a3r$m...@sloth.swcp.com> <4s4agm$9...@news3.digex.net> <4s4c7v$9...@news3.digex.net>
Organization: Object Mentor Inc.
Newsgroups: comp.object

In article <4s4c7v$9...@news3.digex.net>, e...@access1.digex.net (Ell) wrote:

> [BTW, it was he who first time and time again refused to spell my name
> properly. I have raised the issue with him at least once, and tried to
> give him an out by occasionally spelling his correctly throughout my
> articles. Yet he refuses spell mine correctly.]

Elliott. My frequent mispelling of your name (Elliot instead of Elliott)
has been unintentional; albeit careless. I apologize for my lack of attention
with respect to this issue. Nobody likes to have their name mispelled.

I don't recall you brining it up to me in the past; however, it might have
been about the same time that Colin James also informed me that I was
repeatedly spelling his name wrong. So perhaps I got confused.

Again, I apologize, I will endeavor to spell your name correctly in future.

--

"One of the great commandments of science is:
'Mistrust arguments from authority.'" -- Carl Sagan

Shameful inappropriate ad by Robert C. Martin:

--

Green Oaks IL 60048 | Fax: (847) 918-1023 | http://www.oma.com =20

Alan Brain

unread,

Jun 6, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/6/97

to

Robert C. Martin wrote:
>
> L. M. Rappaport wrote:

> > Some guys have all the luck. Maybe if I work really hard, some fine
> > day, I too can get trashed. :-)
> >
>
> Yes, our son, it could happen. With work, hard work, and a lot
> of practice, you too could one day be scum.

They laughed at Newton! They laughed at Einstein! Why won't they laugh
at ME?

Seriously, in the field of Computing anyway, to be on Netscum is now
essentially to be in the Hall-of-Fame.

--
aeb...@dynamite.com.au <> <> How doth the little Crocodile
| Alan & Carmel Brain| xxxxx Improve his shining tail?
| Canberra Australia | xxxxxHxHxxxxxx _MMMMMMMMM_MMMMMMMMM
100026.2014 compuserve o OO*O^^^^O*OO o oo oo oo oo
By pulling MAERKLIN Wagons, in 1/220 Scale
See http://www.z-world.com/graphics/z/master/8856.gif for picture

Ell

unread,

Jun 7, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/7/97

to

Robert C. Martin wrote:
>
> L. M. Rappaport wrote:
> > Some guys have all the luck. Maybe if I work really hard, some fine
> > day, I too can get trashed. :-)
> >

> Yes, our son, it could happen. With work, hard work, and a lot
> of practice, you too could one day be scum.

Who all is the "our"?

Elliott

L. M. Rappaport

unread,

Jun 8, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/8/97

to

e...@access2.digex.net (Ell) wrote (with possible editing):

Bob and Bob. aka Roberts Martin. Twin schizophrenic brothers sharing
the same body. Both of them made it into Netscum. Really bums me out
- BOTH of them get in, but nobody will trash even part of me...

Larry
--
ra...@lmr.com

Robert C. Martin

unread,

Jun 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/11/97

to

Ell wrote:
>
> Robert C. Martin wrote:
> >
> > L. M. Rappaport wrote:
> > > Some guys have all the luck. Maybe if I work really hard, some fine
> > > day, I too can get trashed. :-)
> > >
>
> > Yes, our son, it could happen. With work, hard work, and a lot
> > of practice, you too could one day be scum.
>
> Who all is the "our"?

All the voices in our head! There's Bob. And then, of course,
there's Bob. And we can't forget Bobby, or Robert, or Cecil. Mr. C.
sometimes rears his head. And "Martin-machine-gun-rays" is always
whispering in the corner.

Robert C. Martin

unread,

Jun 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/11/97

to

D. Erway

unread,

Jun 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/11/97

to

>>>>> "rcm" == Robert C Martin <rma...@oma.com> writes:

rcm> Ell wrote:

>> Who all is the "our"?

rcm> All the voices in our head! There's Bob. And then, of course,
rcm> there's Bob. And we can't forget Bobby, or Robert, or Cecil. Mr. C.
rcm> sometimes rears his head. And "Martin-machine-gun-rays" is always
rcm> whispering in the corner.

Yikes! Cecil? Do any of them understand pointers? According to you know
who, I am mistaken about pointers, and misunderstand them! Maybe Cecil could
explain them to me.

I just can't figure out how all those embedded systems, and device drivers,
I've done over the last 15 years all work so well. Just amazing luck I guess,
since I don't understand pointers.

Don Erway derway at ndc.com
NDC Systems 818-939-3847
5314 N. Irwindale Ave Fax:939-3870
Irwindale, CA, 91706

- Hey everybody - whenever you get email spam - put the address of the
perpetrators in your .sig, and the email greppers will start spamming
each other: postm...@savetrees.com, postm...@agis.net

Dean Roddey

unread,

Jun 14, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/14/97

to

Robert C. Martin wrote:
>
> Ell wrote:
> >
> > Robert C. Martin wrote:
> > >
> > > L. M. Rappaport wrote:
> > > > Some guys have all the luck. Maybe if I work really hard, some fine
> > > > day, I too can get trashed. :-)
> > > >
> >
> > > Yes, our son, it could happen. With work, hard work, and a lot
> > > of practice, you too could one day be scum.
> >

> > Who all is the "our"?
>

BTW, who is the person who is doing these "... exposed at ..." things? I
mean I disagree with some people and might think that they are pompous
or ill informed, but this guy must have either a very small brain,
heart, or penis (or probably all of the above.) I just couldn't imagine
anyone so filled with hate that he/she would take the time to maintain
such a large amount of shallow drivel. It takes all kinds to make a cess
pool I guess?

--
Dean Roddey
The CIDLib Class Libraries
'CIDCorp
dro...@ng.netgate.net
http://ng.netgate.net/~droddey/

"Software engineers are, in many ways, similar to normal people"

Ell

unread,

Jun 15, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/15/97

to

Dean Roddey (dro...@ng.netgate.net) wrote:
: Robert C. Martin wrote:

: >

: > Ell wrote:
: > >
: > > Robert C. Martin wrote:
: > > >
: > > > L. M. Rappaport wrote:
: > > > > Some guys have all the luck. Maybe if I work really hard, some fine
: > > > > day, I too can get trashed. :-)
: > > > >
: > >
: > > > Yes, our son, it could happen. With work, hard work, and a lot
: > > > of practice, you too could one day be scum.
: > >
: > > Who all is the "our"?

: BTW, who is the person who is doing these "... exposed at ..." things? I
: mean I disagree with some people and might think that they are pompous
: or ill informed,

First, someone explained that Martin's "our" was a pun. Secondly, if
there is pomposity and "ill informedness", should it not be exposed so
that it won't stink up the place? Or the world for that matter.

: but this guy must have either a very small brain,

: heart, or penis (or probably all of the above.) I just couldn't imagine
: anyone so filled with hate that he/she would take the time to maintain
: such a large amount of shallow drivel. It takes all kinds to make a cess
: pool I guess?

All of the above. :} Shhh right.

My "hatred" on comp.object is beyond personal, it is directed at the real
superficially seductive cess pool that right wing software engineering -
pragmatism - is as a way of doing things.

Elliott

Ell

unread,

Jun 15, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/15/97

to

Ell (e...@access2.digex.net) wrote:
:
: My "hatred" on comp.object is beyond personal, it is directed at the real

: superficially seductive cess pool that right wing software engineering -
: pragmatism - is as a way of doing things.

Pragmatism is nothing but a caricature of the dead, regurgitated past
attempting to "lowjack" the latest progressive technology in software
development.

Elliott

Dean Roddey

unread,

Jun 15, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/15/97

to

Ell wrote:
> : BTW, who is the person who is doing these "... exposed at ..." things? I
> : mean I disagree with some people and might think that they are pompous
> : or ill informed,
>
> First, someone explained that Martin's "our" was a pun. Secondly, if
> there is pomposity and "ill informedness", should it not be exposed so
> that it won't stink up the place? Or the world for that matter.
>

Ummm... Have you ever thought that, if they couldn't figure out for
themselves or didn't care enough to pay attention, that they probably
don't care whether you think so or not? Just a suggestion that might
save you some time and effort.

> : but this guy must have either a very small brain,
> : heart, or penis (or probably all of the above.) I just couldn't imagine
> : anyone so filled with hate that he/she would take the time to maintain
> : such a large amount of shallow drivel. It takes all kinds to make a cess
> : pool I guess?
>
> All of the above. :} Shhh right.
>

> My "hatred" on comp.object is beyond personal, it is directed at the real
> superficially seductive cess pool that right wing software engineering -
> pragmatism - is as a way of doing things.
>

There is such a thing as right wing software engineering? This is news
to me. I agree that these news groups, being the home of a lot of people
like us who are the so called technical elite of the world, are filled
with a lot of posturing and sensitive egos. But, I think you are taking
it a bit too seriously.

In the end, if you want to kick someone's butt in this bidness, build a
better software mousetrap, sell a bazzillion copies, and become a
talking head of the industry. Then you can get paid a lot to say
whatever you think. If your (or my) ideas are truly as superior as we
think, then we should be able to prove it in the marketplace. If they
aren't, or if the marketplace does not care about technical superiority,
then its all kind of spilt milk under the bridge and whatnot. The stuff
that goes on here is, I think, of little consequence to 'real' people
and/or people who can get laid regularly (oh to be among them.)

Just my opinions...

------------------------

Ell

unread,

Jun 16, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/16/97

to

Dean Roddey (dro...@ng.netgate.net) wrote:
:
: [deletia]

I am not going to get in a pissing match with Mssr. Roddey. Bottom line
Roddey, either you support right wing pragmatist software engineering or
you don't.

Elliott

Billy Chambless

unread,

Jun 16, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/16/97

to

In article <5o3rm9$i0r$1...@news2.digex.net>, e...@access2.digex.net (Ell) writes:

>I am not going to get in a pissing match with Mssr. Roddey. Bottom line
>Roddey, either you support right wing pragmatist software engineering or

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>you don't.

Is that anything like the decadent, counterrevolutionary particle physics
that ol' Joe Stalin was so opposed to?

Should we appoint a Political Officer to each development group to make
sure that all our programming practices are ideologically pure?

--
* "We all agree on the necessity of compromise. We just can't agree on
* when it's necessary to compromise."
* --Larry Wall in <1991Nov13.1...@netlabs.com>

Stefan Kapusniak

unread,

Jun 16, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/16/97

to

In comp.databases.object, e...@access2.digex.net (Ell) wrote

>I am not going to get in a pissing match with Mssr. Roddey. Bottom line
>Roddey, either you support right wing pragmatist software engineering or

>you don't.

Snow fell across a cold day into a park filled with straight black
edges.

'It seems,' the one they called The Poodle broke off a piece of bread
and cast it toward the ducks, 'that our beloved ambassador will
shortly be denounced at Moscow Centre as a "reactionary pragmatist
software engineer"'

'How very unfortunate.'

'Indeed, such...uncomfortable...incidents are a lesson to us all.'

The white flakes of snow continued to fall. The Poodle continued to
feed the ducks.

'It occurs me,' the Poodle's companion stared out across the city,
'that where there is one "reactionary pragmatist software engineer"
there may be others.'

'I'm sure Moscow Centre would find your reasoning compelling on this
point. However,' more bread, more ducks, more snow, 'Though I am
not one who would wish to disappoint Moscow I find that there is
a most distressing tendency amongst our more lowly comrades to
quibble about such minor points as evidence. Distressingly
commonplace, yet there it is. Not at all like it was in the old
days; sometimes I feel that we have allowed ourselves to become
decadent old friend.'

'Hmmmmmmm...Let us consider the case where, purely hypothetically...'

'Ah, a hypothetical case, I find this a most sound revolutionary
construct, I commend you for it.'

'...friend Roddey, yes I think friend Roddey, is our "reactionary
pragmist software engineer". I believe that in such as case...'

'...such a _hypothetical_ case...'

'...my people would have no difficulty in finding copious evidence
of his crimes against soviet.'

'Copious evidence you say? Good, goood. It would seem then, my friend,
that comrade Roddey,' the Poodle cast the final crust of bread to the
ducks, 'would be in a great deal of trouble with even the punctilious
of hypothetical investigators,' he smiled at no-one in particular,
'Poor comrade Roddey.'

'Indeed. As you say. Poor comrade Roddey.'

-- Kapusniak, Stefan m

Robert Dewar

unread,

Jun 16, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/16/97

to

Elliot said

<<right wing pragmatist software engineering>>

What an *extremely* odd phrase. Definitely a candidate for amusing news group
oddity of the day :-)

Ell

unread,

Jun 17, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/17/97

to

Billy Chambless (bi...@cast.msstate.edu) wrote:
: In article <5o3rm9$i0r$1...@news2.digex.net>, e...@access2.digex.net (Ell) writes:
:
: >I am not going to get in a pissing match with Mssr. Roddey. Bottom line
: >Roddey, either you support right wing pragmatist software engineering or

: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: >you don't.

: Is that anything like the decadent, counterrevolutionary particle physics
: that ol' Joe Stalin was so opposed to?

Stalin opposed some pragmatists, but in my opinion he was a right wing
pragmatist himself, and in another way so was Krushev. Contact me for
details.

: Should we appoint a Political Officer to each development group to make

: sure that all our programming practices are ideologically pure?

It's not about being ideologically pure, but of following proven practices
of leading development with use case analysis, graphical modelling, and a
holistic approach. The right wing pragmatists attempt to take us away
from these things that most software experts find that really work to
speed development, lessen costs, and ease complexity. In reality
underlying and in spite of all of their spiel they mainly promote hacking
not good engineering.

Elliott

Ell

unread,

Jun 17, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/17/97

to

Robert Dewar (de...@merv.cs.nyu.edu) wrote:
: Elliot said
:
: <<right wing pragmatist software engineering>>

: What an *extremely* odd phrase. Definitely a candidate for amusing news group

: oddity of the day :-)

Fine, but it definitely isn't an oxymoron.

Elliott

Robert Dewar

unread,

Jun 17, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/17/97

to

Elliot says

An oxymoron is the juxtaposition of terms or concepts for poetic or
rhetorical effect that would normally be considered inconsistent (e.g.
"deafening silence").

Actually I find the peculiar phrase here definitely fulfills this
definition, although I realize the original writer might not consider
it to be a contradiction in terms (which is what I would guess he thinks
oxymoron means -- even some dictionaries agree with him these days, which
is a pity -- I hate to see a nice word like this devalued :-)

Message has been deleted

Ell

unread,

Jun 22, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/22/97

to

Nick Roberts (Nick.R...@dial.pipex.com) wrote:
: Is that 'ell' as in 45"?
: More width than quality, perhaps ;-)

Since I'm so shallow it seems you would have easily blown me out of the
water. But nick I have never seen where you've ever made a successful
point against me. Guess that 45 has more than meets the eye, eh?

Elliott

John G. Volan

unread,

Jun 23, 1997, 3:00:00 AM6/23/97

to

Robert Dewar wrote:
>
> An oxymoron is the juxtaposition of terms or concepts for poetic or
> rhetorical effect that would normally be considered inconsistent (e.g.
> "deafening silence").

Or for that matter, "oxy-moron", which in ancient Greek meant
"sharp-foolish" ("sharp" as in wit ... or cheese) :-) .

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Internet.Usenet.Put_Signature
(Name => "John G. Volan",
Employer => "Texas Instruments Advanced C3I Systems, San Jose, CA",
Work_Email => "jvo...@ti.com",
Home_Email => "john...@sprintmail.com",
Slogan => "Ada95: World's *FIRST* International-Standard OOPL",
Disclaimer => "My employer never defined these opinions, so using" &
"them would be totally erroneous ... or is that" &
"just nondeterministic behavior now? :-) ");
------------------------------------------------------------------------