Any Questions about or Suggestions for the next release?

[Steve Lamb]

Thursday, September 02, 1999, 8:07:42 AM, Agents wrote:
> Why don't you give up?

    Because I am right.


> I was the poster, I was very clear on what I wanted accomplished and why
> that was.

    No, you were not.  You have to clarify later on exactly what it was you
meant and people have stated that it could clearly be taken either way.

> You have managed to ridicule and misconstrue the request because you do not
> see the need for this improvement on your system.

    Of course not, I don't use PMMail any longer.  I never said that the
suggestion you made *after you clarified it* isn't needed.  I am standing
firm, however, that when you first made the suggestion it was unclear exactly
what it was that you wanted.

> My request, however, has been backed up by other posters and I think you
> should respect that.

    I think you need to learn to read.  I hate doing this, it happens often,
but go ahead and quote me where I said that your suggestion, multithreading to
increase responsiveness of the input queue, doesn't hold merit.

    Save yourself the trouble because I have been debating two and ONLY two
things:

1: That your statement as you initially presented it was not clear.
2: That multithreading in and of itself does not speed up operations which
otherwise depend on a single piece of hardware to be completed.

    Until you can quote me as saying that multithreading to increase
responsiveness doesn't hold merit I respectfully request that you read EXACTLY
what was written, not what you *THINK* was written, understand what was
written, and not claim that I have said something I have not.  I *WILL* call
you on it every time and I do have the archives to back it up.

> I have been a member of this list for a couple of months and I have to say
> that your comments are most disappointing -- you are frequently arrogant,
> you never admit to being wrong and you can never admit that other people
> have valid points. This has to stop.

    And your quoting is horrible.  What's your point?  You don't like my
comments, be more precise and try to understand what is written, not what you
think is written.  I admit to being wrong when I am wrong.  So far, you have
not proven that to be the case.

    You were unclear in your initial statement.  The fact that you had to
clarify it proves that to be true.  The fact that it can be taken one of
several ways proves it to be true.  So how am I wrong there?

    Throwing more threads at operations that threads will not improve speed on
(disk operations being the most notorious), will not, in anyone's wildest
dreams, speed up the operation.  How am I wrong there?

    I've never said that tossing something that is waiting on a lengthy
operation elsewhere into a thread so you can do things elsewhere is a bad
thing.  How am I wrong there?

    Yeah, I'm arrogant.  I'm also right.  I'm also very tired of people like
you who think they know what I have and have not said and decide to spew,
rather incorrectly, what I have and have not said.

    Now, either quote, back up your statements, or shut up.  I've backed up
mine, do the same.

-- 
         Steve C. Lamb         | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
         ICQ: 5107343          | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------