Serg Koren <Serg at VisualNewt.com> wrote:

I find what I perceive to be your message a little confusing.

> " Sure, people are improving it day by day. It's just that most of that 
> activity is happening on the list where it is semi-public."
> 
> There are NO other Squeak lists...are there?
> So why isn't there a newbie-list? Which has been asked for previously on
> here...or at least a DIGEST version that doesn't flood a newbie with
> 100s of to them, useless emails.  THIS LIST IS *NOT* NEWBIE (much less,
> "user") FRIENDLY!

Well, do you just want a "Thank you for your suggestion" type of an
answer?  The only other answer that seems to make sense to me is to say
that none of us is stopping you from starting such a list.  On the other
hand, no one here has an obligation to start such a list.

> The point is they don't promote Squeak for NEW users, but to those who
> like the thrill of working on THEIR pet project. "Developer's toy"
> again.  Unless this mindset changes, Squeak will always remain a "niche"
> toy (a "toy" language--in the programming meaning of the word "toy") for
> developers, by developers, and only those developers who have an
> interest in playing with the toy rather than using the toy.  It will
> never become a useful TOOL for software developers.  The point of Squeak
> shouldn't be to allow a select group of Smalltalk fiends to test out
> their own pet projects, but a SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT TOOL, others should
> be able to use with minimal pain.

But, but, but ... the point of Squeak can be anything to anyone.  Each
of us "owns" Squeak.  I would be thoroughly delighted if you would work
on making it better and promoting it as a software development tool.  Of
course, you don't owe it to me to do that but neither does anyone else
owe it.  "We already have to much to do" (an XP saying, I believe).
  
> Also, the mentality of "if you want it, or suggest it, you own it and
> should do it" is very demeaning...one of I'm superior and I have more
> important things to work on and you SHOULD be smart enough to do it
> yourself.  Get it through your heads; not everyone with a good
> suggestion IS a Squeak/Smalltalk expert.

I don't see it as demeaning.  It seems to me you have inferred
obligations exist which I do not believe exist.  Don't you think that
shouting "Get it through your heads ..." could be interpreted as either
demeaning or insulting?

> Suggestions:
> a) Create a newbie list targeted at USERS.
> b) Create a core Squeak product that allows you to code in Smalltalk AND
> NOTHING ELSE.  Make it expandable if the person wants to grow later.
> c) Give it a good interface (Sorry, but even Morphic looks like the
> diagrams in the original Smalltalk books I have).
> d) Provide a comprehensive, SIMPLE to understand, user manual.
> e) Provide a comprehensive, SIMPLE Squeak/Smalltalk manual.
> f) Change your attitude toward people who know less than you do.

If you do not wish to produce one or more of the above, how can you
demand anyone else do it?  We are all in the same boat with regard to
"owning" Squeak.  Each one sets his own priorities.  If you say, "yes,
but I don't have the skills", then that is fine providing you do not add
"and therefore someone else owes it to me".  Work on what you can; work
on what it pleases you to work on, and inspire others rather than
berating them?  (Do I fail to follow my own advice?  I hope not; I
really do intend this with goodwill.)

> Sorry if I'm upsetting a few people on here.  But I mean well.  I'm
> trying to get Squeak out of its closet.  If I upset you, then obviously,
> you are one of the people that NEEDS to change...

The first three sentences were ok, but the fourth spoiled it.


-- Frank