Happy Anniversary Inform 6.30
Al
Today is the 2nd Anniversary of Inform 6.30
Time for Graham to release Inform 7
Don't ya think?
Since Emily and a few others had it 2 years ago already.
Heiko Nock
> For those who haven't been paying attention:
> Today is the 2nd Anniversary of Inform 6.30
> Time for Graham to release Inform 7
> Don't ya think?
No. Time for you to stop bugging Graham.
--
"Wenn jemand mit so einem Messer umgehen kann, kann er die Klinge in
Sekundenbruchteilen freilegen und einrasten. Wenn er damit nicht umgehen
kann, hat er noch einen zweiten Versuch mit der anderen Hand."
-- René Vollmeier in de.soc.recht.misc
Al
Heiko Nock wrote:
> No. Time for you to stop bugging Graham.
Good luck with that impossible task.
It seems like Orwell's Animal Farm all animals are equal
but some are more equal than others.
I'll leave that for you to figure out.
Jacek Pudlo
news:1141140327.1...@t39g2000cwt.googlegroups.com...
I think we all know who the pigs are.
Jeff Nyman
> For those who haven't been paying attention:
>
> Today is the 2nd Anniversary of Inform 6.30
>
> Time for Graham to release Inform 7
>
> Don't ya think?
To be honest, for me, I am not sure it would make all that much of a
difference. I mean, Inform 7 might have some nice features but, to be
honest, I am still learning all the ins-and-outs of Inform 6 and I have
not run into any limitations yet; at least limitations that I have
reason to believe will be worth waiting for version 7 to fix.
I guess I would rather Inform 7 be released when it is as ready as
possible, as opposed to early but then requiring a bunch of patching or
whatever. I think of TADS 3, for example, and while I have played
around it, I am always a bit cautious just because I know things are
still in flux (although less so now than was the case) and that makes
me a little cautious to really jump in -- even though there are good
games being pursued with it. Then there is also the case of the manual.
I would rather Inform 7 come out with an updated manual. Again, with
TADS 3 everyone keeps clamoring for a manual now that the system is
available. [The updated manual for Inform 7 would, I suppose, depend on
how much change there is from Inform 6. In the case of TADS 3 vs. TADS
2, of course, the changes are very significant.]
Just my thoughts. If Inform 7 is a viable system and has significant
improvements over Inform 6, I am all for it. But I am also okay waiting
for it as well. (I allow that I might be atypical of the crowd,
however.)
- Jeff
ChicagoDave
And again...this post and all of the other posts remind me of my 2 1/2
year old daughter when she wants candy at the grocery store and the
answer is always the same.
It's not time to have candy. If you wait patiently, you may have some
candy later. If you keep asking, you won't get any candy at all.
David C.
Mike Snyder
news:1141161282.1...@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
What he might be getting at, though -- and this is merely as an observer --
is that it seems to be available to a select few (akin to giving candy to
your favorite kid, but telling the others they'll have to wait, because you
don't like them as much). I figure that's dead wrong, but maybe that's where
Al's coming from.
It hasn't been of interest to me, since I'm not an Inform programmer. If I
was, I figure I'd consider it a beta period (even if a longish one). Inform
is a labor of love, not a commercial product. I assume it would be made
available for public use as soon as it's ready, since that's the whole point
of it. Since it hasn't, I'd assume it's not ready, but that the few in
possession of a beta are the people most likely to be able and willing to
suggest changes and report bugs, rather than clog up the works with too much
urgency ("it's broken, and my new game needs a fix!")
Anyway, that's how I've always handled closed betas. Generally I don't
hand-pick the testers, but once it's closed, I'd rather focus on the core
instead of rush it open to everybody. StarLock was in closed beta for a long
time, and I just didn't want to open it up to everybody because I wasn't
prepared to react to the flood of suggestions, complaints, and questions I'd
get if I did. Maybe that's the case here, too.
As always, I could be wrong. :)
---- Mike.
Poster
> "ChicagoDave" <david.c...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1141161282.1...@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> You sir, are no Emily.
>>
>> And again...this post and all of the other posts remind me of my 2 1/2
>> year old daughter when she wants candy at the grocery store and the
>> answer is always the same.
>>
>> It's not time to have candy. If you wait patiently, you may have some
>> candy later. If you keep asking, you won't get any candy at all.
>
> What he might be getting at, though -- and this is merely as an observer --
> is that it seems to be available to a select few (akin to giving candy to
> your favorite kid, but telling the others they'll have to wait, because you
> don't like them as much). I figure that's dead wrong, but maybe that's where
> Al's coming from.
Al is right on this one, and Mike's summary is apt. The defense of such
asymmetrical treatment, however, is much more offensive than the
treatment itself.
Again, it's not like no-one has the candy: some do and some do not. I
don't want to be part of the insider clique, but I find the existence of
the insider clique a sad facet of r.*.if power politics.
-- Poster
www.intaligo.com Building, INFORM, doom metal
Kevin Forchione
news:1141161282.1...@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
You don't actually believe Graham would waste time reading newsgroup posts
like this, do you? heh!
--Kevin
ChicagoDave
smartass comment.
David C.
Kevin Forchione
>I would have thought this would have been obvious to everyone, hence my
> smartass comment.
Education isn't what it used to be, Dave... what with the New Math and all,
things just haven't been the same.
--Kevin
Dan Shiovitz
Poster <poster!nospam!@aurora.cotse.net> wrote:
>
>
[Inform 7, taking candy from babies, etc]
>
>Al is right on this one, and Mike's summary is apt. The defense of such
>asymmetrical treatment, however, is much more offensive than the
>treatment itself.
>
>Again, it's not like no-one has the candy: some do and some do not. I
>don't want to be part of the insider clique, but I find the existence of
>the insider clique a sad facet of r.*.if power politics.
I am a little confused as to what you want here or think is going
on. If Graham were writing a game, are you saying you think it would
be more fair somehow if he were to release it half-written so everyone
could play it immediately, even though it was buggy and not done yet?
There are some people besides Graham who have gotten a look at I7 --
these people are called "beta-testers", and are presumably doing a
bunch of work putting the system through its paces so that when the
public release comes, it'll be relatively bug-free and have all the
features people want.
This is all speculation since I'm not involved with the Inform 7 stuff
myself, but given that the two main theories for Graham not announcing
anything are
1) Graham is maliciously intent on torturing people, withholding a
fully completed system just to see them suffer for the lack of it
2) Graham isn't announcing Inform 7 because he's not done with it
One of these must seem more likely than the other.
The Inform 7 insider-clique stuff I can't speak to either, obviously,
but I can talk about how the XYZZYs work, if that helps, since that's
the closest thing I'm involved in that's faux-cabal.
The reason why I'm doing most of the admin stuff for the XYZZYs now
instead of Neil deMause (who started them with Eileen) is because one
year I noticed that he hadn't posted anything about it, and I sent him
mail saying "hey, I notice nothing's happening with this, what's up?"
and he said he was busy that year, and I said "well, want me to do
it?" and he said "you bet!" So I started doing it. Presumably part of
the reason he said yes is because he knew me already, both from the
newsgroup and from hanging out on ifMUD, and part is just because I
seemed interested and willing to give it a shot. Later on when I
needed help myself, I thought about people I knew who were good at the
things I needed -- Lucian Smith is a fun guy who's good at MC'ing, and
David Welbourn was already amazingly diligent about cataloging games.
I guess you can call this "insider politics" if you want. It seems to
me that that's missing the fact that this is *always* how things work
in the real world -- if you need something done, you ask a friend
first if you can, because trusting the person and knowing you can work
together are at least as important as the specific skill for the job.
Anyway, so some people who have gotten to this point are saying "wait,
that's not fair! I'm new here and I'm not friends with any of the
important IF people!" Which is a reasonable point, but everyone was
like that once. Basically, you have four strategies for bootstrapping
yourself.
The first thing you can do is Do Cool Stuff. There's this IF Wiki that
people can contribute to, you can review games (SPAG or the IF-Review
will get you lots of exposure, and the latter will even pay you), you
can write games, you can write essays on game design, you can write a
new compiler or interpreter, you can work on publicizing IF outside
our community (I'm sure James Mitchelhill would be happy for
assistance, or do your own thing if you're so inclined) -- seriously,
whatever skills you have, there is something you can do to make a name
for yourself. I don't guarantee that every idea you come up with will
be embraced by folks, but if you try enough things, you'll probably
come up with one that is cool and that people like.
The second thing you can do is Be Social. ifMUD is an obvious place to
hang out and talk to other IF folks, but you can be social and
friendly in your posts here, or join a smaller forum somewhere else
(which tend, by virtue of their size, to be more chatty and
community-forming) like the ADRIFT message board.
The third thing you can do is Wait Around A While. John Scalzi has a
good essay on how he's got connections in the publishing business
because he was friends with people when they were young, and now they
and he have advanced in their careers and they're editors and he's
published writers and it's good stuff. The internet is pretty much the
same way, only on a faster scale -- if you stick around on r*if for a
year and post semi-regularly, people will totally recognize your name
and know who you are.
The fourth thing you can do is Be Proactive. The reason why I'm doing
the XYZZYs now is because I asked. And because Neil said ok -- to
bring this back to the starting topic, I imagine that if people mail
Graham at this point asking to be an I7 beta-tester, he'll say "Sorry,
all full" (or, more likely, maintain an oracular silence which means
more or less the same thing). However, there are plenty of situations
where asking if there's a place to help is the most important
step. Generally it's not *sufficient* -- people will expect to
recognize you from one of the previous three ways. But it's almost
always *necessary*.
Anyway, this is probably more than you wanted to know, and none of
it is official from Graham or even any of the I7 cabal, and I suppose
it won't satisfy Al. But I hope it helps anyway.
>-- Poster
--
Dan Shiovitz :: d...@cs.wisc.edu :: http://www.drizzle.com/~dans
"He settled down to dictate a letter to the Consolidated Nailfile and
Eyebrow Tweezer Corporation of Scranton, Pa., which would make them
realize that life is stern and earnest and Nailfile and Eyebrow Tweezer
Corporations are not put in this world for pleasure alone." -PGW
PJ
If all of you would quit being so condescending to Al, he might get off
this foolish hobby-horse. If you don't like him poking at Graham, just
tell him "Shut up. Graham does this for free, we value him more than
we do you, he'll have V7 out when he and it are ready." Otherwise,
just ignore him.
The only reason people keep up the Cabal myth is that certain prominent
members around here indulge themselves in groupthink attacks against
any idea and any individual they don't respect. If they don't attack
them, they write long, consdescending, "listen and learn, my foolish
child" posts like Dan's above. If you want to kill the myth, quit
acting like you are collaborating behind the scenes with all the other
cabalist actors.
Al's continuing comments on V7 to me look silly and are pointless --
nobody else seems interested in the "light a fire under Graham"
movement he seems to be advocating. But will he look silly in 5 years
if nothing is released? Go ahead and say: "it's not going to be 5
years." Unless you ARE in the Cabal, how would you know that for
certain? And, if you do know the release date, why don't you just TELL
him? It won't make any difference if Graham fails to meet it. He's
under no obligation to anybody here. If we don't pay him for Inform,
we can't realistically demand things from him as customers.
PJ
Jon Rosebaugh
> If all of you would quit being so condescending to Al, he might get off
> this foolish hobby-horse. If you don't like him poking at Graham, just
> tell him "Shut up. Graham does this for free, we value him more than
> we do you, he'll have V7 out when he and it are ready." Otherwise,
> just ignore him.
Right. I trust you've seen Al's repetitive posts trying to organize a
grassroots movement to demand that Zarf release the source of his games?
Or any of Al's other posts? He doesn't learn. At all.
> certain? And, if you do know the release date, why don't you just TELL
> him? It won't make any difference if Graham fails to meet it. He's
> under no obligation to anybody here. If we don't pay him for Inform,
> we can't realistically demand things from him as customers.
Wait, so if a human isn't paying for something, he won't make
unrealistic demands? My, humanity's changed since yesterday.
Andrew Plotkin
>
> The only reason people keep up the Cabal myth is that certain prominent
> members around here indulge themselves in groupthink attacks against
> any idea and any individual they don't respect.
No I don't, and neither do my ninjas.
> Unless you ARE in the Cabal, how would you know that for
> certain? And, if you do know the release date, why don't you just TELL
> him?
Ok, I'm in the Cabal -- seriously -- if you want to believe in such a
thing. There is no release date for I7. I don't know it because Graham
hasn't picked one. Emily doesn't know it because Graham hasn't picked
one. Graham hasn't picked one because I7 isn't done. Did I leave
anything unclear?
--Z
--
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the borogoves..."
*
Bush's biggest lie is his claim that it's okay to disagree with him. As soon as
you *actually* disagree with him, he sadly explains that you're undermining
America, that you're giving comfort to the enemy. That you need to be silent.
Kevin Forchione
news:du4g68$j1a$1...@reader2.panix.com...
> Here, PJ <pete_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> The only reason people keep up the Cabal myth is that certain prominent
>> members around here indulge themselves in groupthink attacks against
>> any idea and any individual they don't respect.
>
> No I don't, and neither do my ninjas.
>
>> Unless you ARE in the Cabal, how would you know that for
>> certain? And, if you do know the release date, why don't you just TELL
>> him?
>
> Ok, I'm in the Cabal -- seriously -- if you want to believe in such a
> thing. There is no release date for I7. I don't know it because Graham
> hasn't picked one. Emily doesn't know it because Graham hasn't picked
> one. Graham hasn't picked one because I7 isn't done. Did I leave
> anything unclear?
Yes... what about the secret handshake? And is there a hat?
--Kevin
PJ
Andrew Plotkin wrote:
There is no release date for I7. I don't know it because Graham
> hasn't picked one. Emily doesn't know it because Graham hasn't picked
> one. Graham hasn't picked one because I7 isn't done. Did I leave
> anything unclear?
That is all that anybody needs to tell Al. Why he persists in asking
for something that no one but Graham knows -- since he seems intent to
continue -- is a mystery to me. It's the long,
more-in-sorrow-than-in-anger,
here's-why-you-shouldn't-ask-that-question posts that seems to be
ticking Al off, and I am mightily bored with them myself. I don't
believe there is a Cabal. But there doesn't have to be a Cabal for
people to post in a highly condescending, extremely irritating fashion
about why their knowledge is superior to others here. Al is acting a
bit of a fool, but he at least probably knows it.
PJ
Adam Thornton
PJ <pete_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Unless you ARE in the Cabal, how would you know that for
>certain? And, if you do know the release date, why don't you just TELL
>him?
Fine, then. You've forced my Invisible Hand. The release date for
Inform 7 is September 31, 2069.
I expect you'll be wanting your cat back. Well, tough noogies.
Adam, speaking for the *entire* Cabal
PJ
Jon Rosebaugh wrote:
> Right. I trust you've seen Al's repetitive posts trying to organize a
> grassroots movement to demand that Zarf release the source of his games?
> Or any of Al's other posts? He doesn't learn. At all.
I have seen his posts, which was clear if you read mine carefully. My
question is, if he doesn't learn, then why do so many people continue
to try and teach him? Who is more annoying in that event, the fool who
could easily be ignored, or the one who makes long, fruitless public
speeches trying to change the actions of the fool?
> Wait, so if a human isn't paying for something, he won't make
> unrealistic demands? My, humanity's changed since yesterday.
Change it to "successfully demand" and you will understand what I am
talking about. If we were paying customers for a new version of
Inform, we would have a contract with Graham, enforceable by legal
action if need be. We don't, we won't, and any "unrealistic demand" Al
makes is bound to be unsuccessful. Apparently, Graham doesn't care, or
doesn't read, Al's plaintive posts. Humanity doesn't need to change to
realize that his "unrealistic demand" is going to be unsuccessful. And
that, by the way, has nothing to do with the content of my post.
Attack my argument, if you would, not carefully selected, out of
context phrases within it.
PJ
José Manuel García-Patos
> Anyway, so some people who have gotten to this point are saying "wait,
> that's not fair! I'm new here and I'm not friends with any of the
> important IF people!" Which is a reasonable point, but everyone was
> like that once.
First let me say that I agree with most of what you wrote, but I still
think there are some considerations to be made.
There are no important IF people. There are only IF people, some of which
are more public or known than others. As public figures (even in such a
small circle as the IF scene), they are subject to public scrutiny. That
means they are not gods. They can be criticized, even if done in such a
lame way as Al. I'm tired of reading some of them on ifMUD whining
about what he or Jacek said. Man, what do you care about those assholes?
They're not even assholes, they're apprentices of asshole. I myself was
the object of some of their trolling once, and I even felt honoured,
because that's a kind of recognition, a kind of welcome to this circus
that I never got from anyone else, exception made of very few people, most
if not all of them ousiders of the official Cabalist trend.
The unpoliteness and coldness with which newbies are treated on the ifMUD
is proverbial, Dan, and you know it. You're an exception to the rule, but
how many exceptions are there? Five? Nobody should be forced to be
wonderful (i.e., write SPAG reviews, write games, or whatever) in order to
make friends with the "important IF people". What is this? A quiz show?
The more points you win, the more important your IF friends will be. Since
when was friendship a prize to be won? Nobody should even feel the need to
be friends with the "important IF people" (or with any other particular
person). Why? What do they offer that others don't? All most people need
of them is already out there: games, libraries, development systems.
That's mostly it. And we all should be grateful for that (and everybody
is, including myself), but that doesn't keep them from being plain people.
"Caesar, remember you're only a man."
If someone doesn't want to contribute to the IF communitity in any way,
that's his choice, and it's no reason to say: You're not worthy of the
friendship of the "important IF people". I've written two SPAG reviews,
God willing I'll write some more, I've betatested several games in several
languages, I'm writing one in collaboration and translating another one, I
recently tried to raise a debate on the outdatedness of the current
development systems, and I made none of those things because I wanted to
make friends with the "important IF people". I did them because I thought
they would mean something for someone somewhere, and because I truly enjoy
it.
So, Dan, you know I respect you, but please don't say things like that
again. They sound like, you know, I'm up here, and you're down there, and
if you want to reach me you gotta follow my rules. It's so narcissistic
of you. Al and Jacek are part of the IF community whether we like it or
not, just like Gollum is a character in LOTR. They're not Aragorn, they're
not elves, they're not even hobbits, but they are important in their own
weird way. As for the "important IF people", I guess they have worn the
ring for too long.
All The Best.
José Manuel García-Patos
Madrid
PJ
Adam Thornton wrote:
> In article <1141226048.3...@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> PJ <pete_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >Unless you ARE in the Cabal, how would you know that for
> >certain? And, if you do know the release date, why don't you just TELL
> >him?
>
> Fine, then. You've forced my Invisible Hand. The release date for
> Inform 7 is September 31, 2069.
Tell it to Al. I'm not interested in the date. I'm just bored with
all the attacks on him from people, who in a phrase, think that they
are the cat's ass in terms of IF.
> I expect you'll be wanting your cat back. Well, tough noogies.
>
> Adam, speaking for the *entire* Cabal
Please feel free to slaughter all the felines you want. If God
intended for cats to inherit the earth, he wouldn't have let the word
"cabal" enter the thoughts of man, right? Let justice roll like a
river, Adam. Just don't expect that particular form of carnage to shut
up brother Al.
PJ
PJ
Jose, that is the best response that can possibly be made to this
ridiculous "jump on Al for jumping on Graham" debate. My own path of
cutting argument invites little more than additional tit-for-tat BS
about the topic. If anyone has the guts to argue with this post, they
should be seriously ashamed of themselves. Brilliantly done. I for
one will shut up completely about it now..
PJ
Samwyse
> The only reason people keep up the Cabal myth is that certain prominent
> members around here indulge themselves in groupthink attacks against
> any idea and any individual they don't respect. If they don't attack
> them, they write long, consdescending, "listen and learn, my foolish
> child" posts like Dan's above.
If you will allow the assumption that everyone in the Cabal has been
offered a beta copy of I7, then I'm pretty sure that Dan isn't a member.
> If you want to kill the myth, quit
> acting like you are collaborating behind the scenes with all the other
> cabalist actors.
I'd like to reply to this, but I don't want to have my secret decoder
ring revoked.
steve....@gmail.com
> Time for Graham to release Inform 7 [....]
Quite aside from the whiny polemical tone this thread has taken from
the outset, I'd be interested to find out the rationale for developing
Inform privately. "It's not ready" is too vague for me.... Manifestly,
it's not ready for public release, but what is it not yet, that makes
it not yet ready for public release? Has public betatesting been
entirely excluded? (If so, why, and if not, what determines when this
period begins?) I don't care either way, I'm just interested in the
rationale.
I'd also be interested to compare how sucessful this development
strategy is, compared with more open development.
I can see why people of the "open source" ideological disposition would
be turned off, even offended, by the development strategy of Inform. I
might vaguely sympathize with this side of the argument (as well as the
other, if I understood it well enough), but really that's not what I'm
expressing here -- I'm just curious.
I understand, though I disagree, with the cynical suspicions that the
in-group is deriving evil pleasures from their private control of their
toys. But I *can* say that, if I were invited into the Inform Private
Developers club, I'd feel pretty darn proud of myself; and I should say
that they *should* feel pretty darn proud of themselves. So maybe there
is some of that going on (though I don't see anything particularly evil
about that pleasure).
I have another theory (which I also don't really take too seriously),
that Inform developers are under a whole lot of pressure from Tads-3,
and are suffering from a great deal of performance anxiety, which is
maybe slowing down the release -- if only so they have enough time to
fix Inform up well enough that it looks competitive. Like I said, I
don't take this really seriously, although I suppose there might be
something to it as well. To whatever extent this might be the case, I
say this is a situation where friendly competition remains really
productive for everyone concerned, so good.
Neil Cerutti
Getting into the Cabal requires a lot of dedicated work, but you get
to decide the work to which you wish to be dedicated. Nobody ordered
Graham to honcho the Z-machine project, or design, implement and
document Inform.
Nobody ordered me to do virtually nothing, yet I've been truly
dedicated to that for years.
--
Neil Cerutti
Cheer up, Freddy. You've got the best part in the picture. And
you, Anna. You've got the best part, too! --Samuel Goldwyn
Baron d'IF
Dan "touch-me-anywhere-and-I'll-excrete-condescension" Shiovitz:
> > Anyway, so some people who have gotten to this point are saying "wait,
> > that's not fair! I'm new here and I'm not friends with any of the
> > important IF people!" Which is a reasonable point, but everyone was
> > like that once.
The fun part is that good old Dan considers himself an IF VIP. Not only
that, he's also a self-appointed spokesperson for the VIPs. I wonder
what dragged *him* over from obscurity into the world of IF fame? What
is that game about a talking tree and walking bushes? Or is it his
decade-long kindergarten teacher act? How much does it really take to
"reach the top"? Is being a condescending twit for ten years enough?
It reminds me of another Lord book: the Lord of the Flies. It's about a
bunch of innocent boys who get stranded on a deserted island and have
to rebuild civilisation from scratch. You'd think they'd create Heaven
on Earth, on account of being so innocent, but instead they create
hell. Only a small group cares about things like shelter and food. The
rest treat their situation as a great game in which they cast off the
restrictions of society and find their primal roots, which involves
worshipping pig heads, psychotic misconceptions of their own grandeur
and murder.
Perennial graduate students, "freelancers", commercial game designers
who haven't designed any commercial game for years, menial IT workers,
these are the people who make up the "important" crowd. For once in
their unimportant little lives they get to be "important". IF is their
deserted island where they can build their ideal society, away from the
banal reality of their futile lives.
Andrew Plotkin
>
> The unpoliteness and coldness with which newbies are treated on the ifMUD
> is proverbial, Dan, and you know it.
I don't. Are you thinking of specific examples?
Jacek doesn't count, and neither do Al, Paul Panks, etc. Those people
are many things, but "newbies" they are not. They've spent years
building up their respective reputations.
--Z
--
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the borogoves..."
*
Making a saint out of Reagan is sad. Making an idol out of Nixon ("If the
President does it then it's legal") is contemptible.
Andrew Plotkin
>
> Andrew Plotkin wrote:
> > There is no release date for I7. I don't know it because Graham
> > hasn't picked one. Emily doesn't know it because Graham hasn't picked
> > one. Graham hasn't picked one because I7 isn't done. Did I leave
> > anything unclear?
>
> That is all that anybody needs to tell Al.
I didn't respond to him, actually. I was responding to you.
> It's the long, more-in-sorrow-than-in-anger,
> here's-why-you-shouldn't-ask-that-question posts that seems to be
> ticking Al off, and I am mightily bored with them myself.
I am not strongly in favor of them myself. (See above.) But long
more-in-sorrow posts about the sad state of how RAIF treats people are
just as bad, and even more off-topic.
So I shall end this one here. :)
--Z
--
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the borogoves..."
*
ChicagoDave
For those of us that have been involved in the IF community for many
years, we have learned some valuable lessons about this
community.....here are some of mine that seem to be related to this
whole cabal thing...
1. If you have an idea for something related to IF, it is almost
entirely your best bet to implement a solution and test case before you
share it, otherwise you will be cudgeled with at least fourteen
different "better solutions" or worse, you will be completely and
absolutely ignored.
2. IF is an artform and one with wildly differing opinoins as to its
practice and implementation. My assumption is that every individual in
this community is an artist. My view of being an artist is that it is
almost an entirely non-collaborative act. There are some collaborative
efforts, but they are usually done between friends or done via mailing
lists. The mailing lists, such as the one for TADS 3 or the one for
maintaining Inform 6, is not really a big secret.
3. There are a few people within the community who absolutely deserve
our respect and patience. One of these persons is Graham Nelson. Graham
does whatever he does on his own dime and he does it in such a way that
results in something truly amazing. Whatever is happening with Inform 7
is controlled completely and absolutely by Graham and not by anyone
else.
4. There is no cabal, but there are relationships. Some of these
relationships have come from ifMUD. Some of these relationships have
come from proximity (all the Seattle people generally know each other -
same for the NYC crowd). Some of these relationships have come from
general IF discussion, such as when I volunteered to publish the DM4
for Graham.
5. If you find yourself lacking in IF relationships, how can you get
involved? I have a list of suggestions:
a. Join ifMUD and converse with the regulars.
b. Do something with IF that shows you are truly passionate about
it.
c. Make friends with your local IFers.
I'm more or less repeating Dan's thoughts and I'm sure this is how any
so-called insiders feel. We didn't sign up for anything...we just did
stuff or we just talked to people and got more involved.
This reminds me of the workplace. There are always people that complain
that they need to be trained before they can be promoted. It's my view
that you have to train yourself to be promoted. You have to do the work
first, then get promoted. It sucks because you end up doing a lot of
work hoping you'll get promoted with the chance that you won't, but
that's how it works and that's how it has always worked.
The same goes for getting more involved in the IF community. If you
want to build relationships or know more about what's going on, all you
have to do is do it.
A little note to really press the point.
If anyone had thought to join the Inform maintenance mailing list,
thereby getting involved, you would know as much as I do about Inform
7.
David C.
Jacek Pudlo
news:du4vof$lhl$1...@reader2.panix.com...
> Here, José Manuel García-Patos <jo...@cervantes.org> wrote:
>>
>> The unpoliteness and coldness with which newbies are treated on the ifMUD
>> is proverbial, Dan, and you know it.
>
> I don't. Are you thinking of specific examples?
>
> Jacek doesn't count, and neither do Al, Paul Panks, etc. Those people
> are many things, but "newbies" they are not. They've spent years
> building up their respective reputations.
In the static fiction community there are many ways of distinguishing the
"ins" from the "outs". To start with, the distinction between writers and
non-writers is much sharper there than in IF. On top of that, you have a
rich flora of social events. Book signings, lectures, publishing parties,
seminars, you name it. In other words, there's plenty of opportunity to
strut your feathers. IF has little or none of that. The only way of showing
others that you're truly "in", and that they are truly "out", is through
secrecy. The tricky thing about secrecy is that if you're really discreet
about your secret project, no one will know about it. One way of solving
this tricky dilemma -- and this is what Andrew and Emily have been doing for
some time now -- is to hint at the secret project's existence while at the
same time not disclosing any details. Anyone with any kind of experience in
the software or publishing business will tell you that announcing a future
release without stating a deadline is bad form. The only purpose it can
possibly serve is to say that "X doesn't count," where X is anyone who
doesn't have the latest toys.
[snip of bumper sticker]
José Manuel García-Patos
>> The unpoliteness and coldness with which newbies are treated on the ifMUD
>> is proverbial, Dan, and you know it.
>
> I don't. Are you thinking of specific examples?
Of course. I'd say you are one of them, zarf. Remember when I asked
you where you were from? Want to hear the real story about that? I had
this friend, and I was chatting with him on IRC. We were talking about the
people on ifMUD and at some moment he said that you were British. I said:
I don't think so. He replied: Plotkin sounds Brit. And I said: You're
drunk. And added: Well, he's on the MUD right now. I can ask him. And so I
did. But I thought it was unpolite to ask you right away, as we had never
spoken before, so I invented the bet thing, just so it didn't sound like I
was trying to get personal with you or something, because it was not the
case. Remember how you acted? I do. And it was cold and unpolite. You
could have just said: I prefer not to answer to that. Or: Why are you
betting precisely on that? Or whatever. But you probably thought: Who is
this new asshole?
Quite frankly, I think you're paranoid. Maybe you have your reasons (you
most probably do), but it's only natural that some people get pissed off
by your attitude. And let me get this straight. I don't want us to be
friends, I have never played any of your games (I just never felt like
it) and I have never used Glulx, so I have nothing against or in favour of
you, and more importantly, we have nothing to expect from each other,
except maybe respect. And that's all I ask of anyone I know, you're not
even special on that. Did I make myself clear now?
Now, if anyone else wants to know if I consider him/her to be a
"specific example" and why or why not, just ask.
> Jacek doesn't count, and neither do Al, Paul Panks, etc. Those people
> are many things, but "newbies" they are not. They've spent years
> building up their respective reputations.
Where did I say they were newbies? What I said was: Stop treating newbies
as potential Jaceks or Als.
José Manuel García-Patos
> The fun part is that good old Dan considers himself an IF VIP. Not only
> that, he's also a self-appointed spokesperson for the VIPs. I wonder
> what dragged *him* over from obscurity into the world of IF fame?
If you have to ask what Dan Shiovitz has done for the IF community, you're
obviously not a part of it. And according to the rest of your comments,
it's better that way.
Dan Shiovitz
Baron d'IF <baro...@gmx.net> wrote:
[..]
>The fun part is that good old Dan considers himself an IF VIP. Not only
>that, he's also a self-appointed spokesperson for the VIPs. I wonder
>what dragged *him* over from obscurity into the world of IF fame? What
Actually, Jacek, it's your careful attention I have to thank for it. I
mean, think about it: who else are you taking the trouble to name-check --
Emily and Zarf? When else am I going to get the chance to be mentioned
with them in an IF context? I don't understand what you get out of it,
but on my side, I get a warm glow of satisfaction whenever you take
time away from your busy schedule of not writing IF, not reviewing IF,
and thinking up new pseudonyms, to write a message to me and point the
spotlight in my direction.
Having read the other responses to my post, I think the only other
thing I should add is that, obviously, my points have exactly as much
authority as you choose to give them. If you're happy with how things
are for yourself, there's no reason to change anything. If not, why
not give it a shot?
Daryl McCullough
>Quite aside from the whiny polemical tone this thread has taken from
>the outset, I'd be interested to find out the rationale for developing
>Inform privately...
>I'd also be interested to compare how sucessful this development
>strategy is, compared with more open development.
I have also wondered why, with software that is not intended
to make a profit (such as Inform), the author(s) wouldn't just
make it open source. Maybe they are concerned about quality, and
are worried that an open-source version will not maintain their
own personal standards. Maybe they have in mind a particular
development path, and are concerned that an open source version
would drift off in the "wrong" direction.
I don't know. It's speculation on my part, because I've never written
a program that any significant number of people I don't know would
ever care to use. But my feeling is this:
1. It's Graham's program, and he can do whatever he likes with it,
and it's nobody else's business what his motivations are.
2. Really, Inform 6.3 is pretty good already. I don't understand
people waiting with bated breath for release 7. If you already
know enough about Inform to know what the latest release number
is, then you should know enough to be able to use that version,
and to work around any bugs, flaws, etc. There is no reason you
*have* to have release 7.
--
Daryl McCullough
Ithaca, NY
Daryl McCullough
>Who is more annoying in that event, the fool who
>could easily be ignored, or the one who makes long, fruitless public
>speeches trying to change the actions of the fool?
Or maybe the one who makes long, fruitless public speeches trying
to change the behavior of those who make long, fruitless public
speeches? Or maybe the one posts an article (such as this one)
containing pointless self-reference, thinking that makes it
somehow witty?
Let's face it, they're all annoying.