>We don't need any big bad wolf
>monikers here. No need for agreements or licenses to be issued to be less
>than civil. Just good faith, honest discussion and debate.
>
>I'd also like to point out that lazy intellects are not the only reason
>that ideas here are not thoroughly thought out.

I don't agree because history and political theory show that this is not how
progressive communities evolve.

Political theory teaches that all communities need myths (in the political /
technical sense). These myths are what binds the community together, in the
end. It encourages bonding. It evolves a power structure which is necessary
in evolving a cohesive community - this is the same whether the community is
a wolf pack or an entire nation.

In a community that is on the road to somewhere, it needs headstrong
innovators.

If you really come to think of it, if the Big Bad Wolf was such a nice guy,
satisfied with how things were, Interbase would not come into existence.

It was because he was continuously dissatisfied with things, that kept him
going, and gave him the EUREKA experience that readers don't need to block
writers and vice versa.

The BBW is an asset to the community. And despite the wounds some of us may
nurse from the occasional snarls he emits, we will all be better off in the
end, because contributors will be pushed to do even better.

I remember that Linus T. confessed that in the early days of Linux, the old
guy Andy Tanembaum himself frequently engaged him in a fierce head chewing
exercise.

>One piece of culture lost in the general Borland/Inprise emphasis
>on secrecy is that major changes used to be discussed generally, openly
>and critically within the entire engineering group.

If you take a look at some of the VCL code at Delphi, there are times when
you would wish that Borland also had a resident wolf instead of flashy
nice-talking sales people involved the code.

Joseph Alba
jalba@...