"1. Anyone who writes with such emotionally charged, opinionated
language about JavaScript is unlikely to write anything of interest to
me. Reminds me of ESPN commentators, who manage to make a bad call
sound like a cause for WWIII, a shallow ploy designed to attract
attention to themselves."

You find my charged language unbecoming. 
And then you'll say that you want Squeak to change for the
better. As long as nobody gets too worked up about it. Righto. I 
think that's a great definition of the status quo.


"2. The debate over Smalltalk and children is pointless."

Ahh, no. I think it's key. We are the only Smalltalk that is so close
to the originators of the language. I think the intellectual atmosphere 
of Squeak may be restricted because we are so close to a cause -- 
childhood education. I'd like to see a Squeak that is a small core with 
no inherent purpose. And then any project, with any purpose can be 
suddenly added to the core. For Squeak to change, I think it needs to 
be intellectually free of any cause. 

Let me be perfectly clear about one thing. I'm not backing down from this 
stance. And if it means that I shouldn't be on the Board (and the elections
are coming up) then I shouldn't be on the Board. Period. But after six 
years my skills are reaching critical mass. This is the year I get good. 
As a side effect, I'm becoming more rigid minded than ever during this process. 
Emerging from the chrysalis is making me ... absolute minded. 
If you want somebody with a more palatable tone, then, Gary, you should run again
for the Board. I'm becoming more extreme than I usually am. And loving 
every minuted of it. If that doesn't suit the community, I'm fine with that. 
I'm becoming too drugged on programming success to care. 

Chris