Re: [boost] [trolling] Alexander's crusade

Subject: Re: [boost] [trolling] Alexander's crusade
From: Gruenke, Matt (mgruenke_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-05-09 22:33:24

On Mon 5/9/2011 8:27 PM, Gregory Crosswhite wrote:

> it nonetheless needs to be acknowledged that after his opinion was
> heard and people stopped asking him questions about it he allowed
> the matter to be dropped,

I'm not so sure it *needs* to be acknowledged.  If we start down that path, I can imagine several other aspects of this thread that people might feel an equal or greater need to have acknowledged.

> it was others who insisted on resurrecting the thread and directly provoking 
> him until he responded.

"Provoking"?  That's an interesting perspective.  I followed the entire thread and while I recall a lot of confusion and frustration on the part of list contributors, I do not recall much in the way of outright provocation of Alexander.  On the other hand, was his initial subject ([boost] [provocative] Whom did the SFC pay to list boost developers as a whole in "Current Member Projects"?) not a clear acknowledgment that provocation factored prominently into his objectives?  It's one thing to side with his argument (assuming it's appropriate for the list), but to defend his behavior in this thread seems unnecessary.

I've so far seen no value in getting involved, but this point just breached my limit.  While I don't want to feed the flame, I thought it might be worth offering my views as one who has no established stake in this thread.

Matt