Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!jarthur!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!midway!msuinfo!netnews.upenn.edu!grad2.cis.upenn.edu!aaron
From: aaron@grad2.cis.upenn.edu (Aaron Watters)
Newsgroups: comp.databases
Subject: Re: Comment on the "Third-Generation Database System Manifesto"
Message-ID: <30574@netnews.upenn.edu>
Date: 4 Oct 90 12:41:34 GMT
References: <1990Sep28.173803.15043@odi.com> <7798@star.cs.vu.nl> <30441@netnews.upenn.edu> <7824@star.cs.vu.nl>
Sender: news@netnews.upenn.edu
Reply-To: aaron@grad2.cis.upenn.edu.UUCP (Aaron Watters)
Distribution: comp
Organization: University of Pennsylvania
Lines: 14

In article <7824@star.cs.vu.nl> roelw@cs.vu.nl (Wieringa j Roel) writes:
> My point is that the 
>pressure of funding my divert too must energy from the research effort
>to the fund-raising effort, that the closeness of commercially lucrative
>results may hinder the open exchange of ideas, and that an excessive pressure
>to publish results may cause the publication of immature results. None
>of these dangers may materialize, but only if we remain beware of them.

I certainly agree.  What does this have to do with the manifestos?
It seems to me this is an orthogonal issue.
You also argue that the people with the most forceful arguments 
may be `wrong' (in some sense).  I can't deny this either.  What
alternative to open discussion and the taking of bold and
controversial positions do you suggest?  No discussion?		-aaron