> I think maybe this very feeling "oh, we have to wait until we have
	> better tools and processes because documentation is a multideveloper
	> issue" is part of the problem.  The best documentation comes when one
	
	Well, I am not arguing for us to wait - quite the opposite. But I do
	argue for also bringing about better tools because it will make a huge
	difference in the long run. I mean, that argument could as easily have
	been made against doing SM too you know. And I hope you agree that SM
	has turned out to something really good, right?
	
SqueakMap is *GREAT*.  Whenever I'm feeling about ready to give up on
Squeak, something like this comes along to prove that it really _is_ a
wonderful environment where great things are happening.

	> But for each topic, it has to be someone who understands that topic
	> pretty well, NOT someone who is screaming for documentation because
	> they feel dumb and helpless without it.  Suggesting that the ignorant
	> should be the instructors is not, perhaps, the cleverest suggestion
	> to post in an open source project's mailing list.
	
	This last paragraph feels like the "punchback" I was waiting for. ;-)
	But if it is and you are implying that I have said that - then I would
	like a quote, because I can't remember ever saying that.
	
In my view, suggesting that >I< (ignorant as I remain about practically
everything in Squeak that wasn't in LaLonde) should produce documentation
counts as "suggesting that the ignorant should be the instructors".