Where Tunes is going.
Wed, 27 Oct 1999 20:41:41 -0700
> From: Brian Rice [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Subject: Re: Where Tunes is going.
> At 10:21 AM 10/26/99 -0400, email@example.com wrote:
> existence. I furthermore believe that the lack of response
> to my e-mails
> indicates that you are not taking my suggestions seriously at
> all. The
Or we're sceptical. I don't think my scepticism reflects ill on you or me,
but I find it hard to believe that you're doing anything as new as you
claim, when your descriptions of your work sound just like other people's
descriptions of their formalisms.
I don't find it hard to believe that you're doing something worthwhile; if
it were possible for me to get excited about Tunes again, I'd likely be
excited. You are at least attempting to lead Tunes, even if you're not
> It's not my fault that I am so frustrated.
Hmm. Bad start to that sentence.
> I have appealed to many
> different groups and professors for feedback on my ideas, and
> have turned up nothing.
Not quite -- we've each put some energy into reviewing them, myself less
than some others (sorry; my loss; I just have to get through school and
survive work). Your ideas take a lot of energy to understand, and the way
you describe them makes them sound like yet another formalism. There have
been a LOT of formalisms in the past; a pretty UI isn't going to make
another one any different.
> all know that such standards were dropped long ago as important Tunes
> issues were discussed for a time and then dropped without any sort of
> formal resolution. When I started noticing problems like that with
> frequent regularity, I realized that Tunes has not progressed
> for quite a
> while in any helpful way.
> Hoping that we will change this situation,
I have to admit that I admired your recent post on that subject. If
chutzpah can turn us around, you're our man (and I don't see anything
better). I'm not going to leave, and perhaps in a quarter I'll be able to
contribute (at last free!).