Xref: utzoo comp.lang.c++:5200 comp.object:268 Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!odi!mlm From: mlm@odi.com (Mitchell Model) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.object Subject: Re: Remarks on the Wiener/Pinson Tutorial on C++ at OOPSLA'89 Message-ID: <1989Oct24.140024.11372@odi.com> Date: 24 Oct 89 14:00:24 GMT References: <6667@pdn.paradyne.com> Distribution: na Organization: Object Design, Inc. Lines: 31 In-Reply-To: reggie@dinsdale.nm.paradyne.com's message of 17 Oct 89 14:51:14 GMT Actually, you could say this about other topics as well at OOPSLA. > It is a sad fact that there are people out there who are trying to > capitalize on a popular theme by teaching tutorials or running seminars > without adequate preparation. But then again, isn't that the American > Way :-) I know there have been a lot of poor tutorials at OOPSLA conferences, and I don't want to defend them. However, people should be aware that due to ACM policy restrictions, tutorial speakers "capitalize" to the extent of (at least at OOPSLA '88 rates) $400 per half day tutorial, airfare, and the cost of a room for one night. Such rates don't provide much motivation for preparation, though there are of course other motivations. Your money, therefore, goes to the ACM, which undoubtedly loves the OOPSLA conference. It might simply be that people are getting what the ACM pays for, rather than what they deserve. When I think of all the forces and factors over the years that have futhered the development and propagation of object technology the ACM does not come immediately to mind. Proposal: let's start an independent society for object technology (if someone can think of a non-silly name) and create a proper home for OOPSLA, tutorials, journals, and other such activities. The Artificial Intelligence Society could serve as a model. -- Mitchell L Model Object Design, Inc. Director, HeadStart Program 1 New England Executive Park Burlington MA 01803 mlm@odi.com, odi!mlm@uunet.uu.net (617) 270-9797