To: stik@on-luebeck.de
Subject: Re: STIK: STiK 1                                                                


On Wed, 19 Feb 1997 01:52:25 Martin-Eric Racine <q-fun wrote: 
>
>1) STiK 1 *is* being improved and that's a fact. The reason why
>   you don't hear about it is because if STiK 1 is viewed by too
>   many as an obsolete thing, even though Steve's original plans
>   had many provisions for further improvements, then there's no
>   point in telling the doctor you're alive and kicking when he's
>   already pronounced you terminally ill, is there, Ronald?

What !?!  Will you never stop putting words in my mouth ???
I have never called STiK 1 either ill or obsolete, and you know it.
I have said that I believe the STiK 2 concept has more potential.


>2) Betas are not sent because they involve some brand new source
>   from Michael White to bring CSLIP/PPP to STiK 1 that is still
>   in very crude stage of development, because all of STiK 1 but
>   the dialer is now ported into the TSR, and because the dialer
>   is going through a major facelift and being expanded to allow
>   some of the proposed extensions (delay/repeat/find/resp).

Huh?  Since when does major changes decrease testing needs...?


>3) I *H A V E* tried the last STiK 2 beta and _still_ feel the
>   same about what I previously said:  yes, the user-interface
>   will _probably_ be improved later, but then ROUTE.TAB and
>   other parts of STiK 2 are just too painful to setup, which
>   a better user-interface won't ever resolve. (pun intended!)

I think ROUTE.TAB is pretty straight-forward, although any final
package naturally should contain some prepared standard tables.
For the most common setups.  You do realize that we must have
some routing system in a multi-port implementation don't you ?


>Ronald, would it be too much to ask you to refrain from replying to
>every little paragraph of every post with a 16 page post

I will answer as I feel each situation merits, and that will vary.
I may be a bit wordy at times, but that is often because some do
insist on misunderstanding or twisting my statements around.


>stop implying that either Dan or myself rumour things.

By rumour I do not mean to imply any falseness, just vagueness.
Truth can also spread by rumour, but I prefer hard facts.


>Just because you don't see direct involvement into something, or don't
>receive a given alpha or beta doesn't mean progress isn't happening.

No, and I never said so either.


>As I had to remind my college principal today, excellence isn't a
>mesure of social participation. Elite students neither drink nor
>party (at least until AFTER the exams are through, but then oiii!)
>nor get noticed hanging around. Maybe they go un-noticed, but while
>everyone else wastes time, they're rehearsing and studying quietly.

And I suppose I am the hangabout drunkard while you're the Elite Student !
Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear...  (I can't help smiling at the picture)

In order to impress me with similes of this kind you would have had
to try it some decades earlier. (But I wasn't very gullible even then)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regards:  Ronald Andersson                     mailto:dlanor@oden.se
                                               http://www.oden.se/~dlanor
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
