Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!pitt!willett!ForthNet
From: ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Forth in the Computer Journal
Message-ID: <2262.UUL1.3#5129@willett.pgh.pa.us>
Date: 23 Jan 91 16:34:18 GMT
Organization: (n.) to be organized.  But that's not important right now.
Lines: 26

Category 13,  Topic 1
Message 11        Sun Jan 20, 1991
C.MCEWEN                     at 13:52 EST
 
Gary, you are reading much more into my previous response than was there. I am
saying that proper support *to* Forth users requires proper response *from*
Forth users. It is a simple equation. A lack of good submissions by default
will result in substandard support. As I said before, I *want* to see TCJ
continue its Forth support. It is an integral part of the editorial plan of
the journal. But we need to establish a cohesive unit here.

You mention your telephone conversations with Art. Perhaps you and I should
have a similar conversation. If you feel that this discussion is commercial in
nature (with money changing hands, from subscribers to me, and from me to
printers, the post office, etc, it does necessarily have commercial aspects)
then let me apologise. That was not my intent.

So that there is no misunderstanding, I value Matt's contributions very
highly. He and I have spent hours talking about the directions of his series.
But he is one author with one viewpoint. This is a far larger community and
deserves other views.  {*s
-----
This message came from GEnie via willett.  You cannot Reply to the author
using email.  Please post a follow-up article, or use any instructions
the author may have included (USMail addresses, telephone #, whatever).
Report problems to: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us or uunet!willett!dwp