I've watched this one from the sidelines for a while, and have finally
decided to throw in an opinion. Feel free to throw it out.
 
There are lots of bright people in the world, each with their own perspective
on how anything ought to be done "right." That's fine. The competition to
be "better" is what provides the setting for progress.
 
However, it's also important to respect the individual's work in this process.
Because, if individuals get abused for innovating or improving, most of them
will decide it's not worth it and move on to doing something more rewarding
or less irritating.
 
Eric Thomas designed, built, and supports a list manager named LISTSERV. He
gave it a name. Respect for his work, if not his concepts, design, or
implementation, give him the rights to its proper name.
 
Others certainly have a right to build list managers. They also deserve
respect for their work, the right to name it distinctly, and to promote it
in comparison to other work.
 
I think, however, that they would be distressed to see someone else sign
their personal name to a note because the implication would be that it was
their message. If I were Eric, I would be distressed to see something that I
have worked on for years have its name used by others, making his work and
contribution ambiguous.
 
For example, Lotus makes 1-2-3 and Microsoft makes EXCEL. They both are quite
comfortable advertising themselves as spreadsheets.
Likewise, with Microsoft Word and WordPerfect being word processors.
 
Why not agree to call list managers just that and give different proper names
to each individual? Eric used and has rightful claim on LISTSERV. Let anyone
else build a better list manager and call it whatever they want, as long as
it uniquely identifies their work.
 
--
 
B. Alton Brantley, Jr                               [log in to unmask]
The Milton S. Hershey Medical Center       Penn State College of Medicine
                            Hershey, PA USA 17033