No, you have to separate all those good intentions and efforts of you and
all the other builders AND the way all this work shows to the world: This
article suggest that...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bijan Parsia [mailto:bparsia at email.unc.edu]
> Sent: donderdag 27 september 2001 15:38
> To: squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> Subject: Re: Computerchannel.de: Squeak 3.0 tested
> 
> 
> On Wed, 26 Sep 2001, Gary Fisher wrote:
> 
> > Thank you, Bert.  Your translation is much better than what 
> Babelfish
> > managed.  <g>
> 
> Yay Bert! (The "Yay" is almost always superfluous :))
> 
> > Some of the article's conclusions are at least marginally 
> valid, but others
> > imply the author entirely missed the point.
> 
> [snip]
> 
> Or, as other folks pointed out, was grossly ignorant...and not just of
> Squeak.
> 
> I.e., it seemed to suggest that the only directed-toward-kids 
> programming
> language is an early-80's Logo.
> 
> Plus, I got the impression that they didn't look at any of the *kid's*
> stuff in Squeak. Oh well, yadda yadda yadda.
> 
> Cheers,
> Bijan Parsia.
> 
> 
> 
>