Re: Speaking for myself NOT for others about OI

Mike Roberts (miker@nashua.progress.COM)
Fri, 9 Sep 1994 15:27:17 PDT

On Fri, 9 Sep 1994 17:34:32 -0400 (EDT) Mark D. Pesce wrote:

I have some comments on the excerpt from Mark's post, below.

> We have been at this proces fsor 4
> months already, soon to be five, and you walked in the middle and
> have basically been acting like you own the place since then. Well, I've
> been a little bit too busy making VRML *real* to piss on your camfire,
> but listen here - PUT OR SHUT UP. I'm not at this to get rich (you should
> ask anyone whom I do work with, as they'll tell you how I'm just about in
> backruptcy form day to day, because I foolishly follow this quest rather
> than getting a high paying job in the industry, because this is what I
> love, not because I see a huge pot of gold at the end of it), and I spend
> time getting people to *do* things with VRML, rather than making a series
> of rather *lackluster* postings about this or that minor detail. My goal
> in life right now is to see VRML *freely* available everywhere, and I've
> lost jobs, money and a boyfriend to this so far, so don't ASSUME you know
> anything about my motives execpt that, to any standard you could hope to
> hold me to, I'd look so lilly white I'd burn your eyes out.

This is not the kind of post I expect from a list moderator in any way, shape or
form, regardless of provocation (or not, as the case may be). Some calming
down is clearly **required** here. I also feel that it is time to express my
opinions on the subject of this list. These are ** just my opinions** and are
not aimed at invalidating the subject matter of the discussion which goes on
here, or slapping anyone in particular.

1) Although I arrived in the fairly early stages of this list, I got no impression
that the list came to being out of a cohesive movement on any of the relevant
news groups. Perhaps I am wrong and, if so, I'd like to hear it.

as such, I think that ..

2) This list arose out of the opinions of a small number of people who wanted
input on their ideas. I had a problem accepting this to being with, because I
felt it constrained the discussion on the list. So, although I was generally
interested in the area, I saw that the VRML list didn't, and would never be
allowed to, satify my particular development goals (obtaination of a cross
platform renderer with an external object maniuplation API, so I can go off and
write collaborative, distributed, multi-user 3-d development environments).
The list is contrained towards Mark's (and, to a lessor extent, others) very
specific view of how to do net.vr, a fairly nebulous entity we know as VRML.
The nature of this constraint is a contant re-itteration of "well, if we discuss
that, we'll never get anywhere". There are other places to discuss general
net.vr, and perhaps the time has come to engage a little more reliance upon
them. I, for one, would welcome starting discussions of a more general
nature, elsewhere, as this is certainly not occurring here. Probably Mark etc
al would, as well. Again, I am open to correction on this.

In any case, eventually, I decided to sit back and watch, contributing little, a
few months ago.

Good things may emerge from this list (I have already asked Mark for a beta
copy of his stuff, and I hope he gives it to me, because I **do** have a use for
it), but I do not believe that this list is not a list in which the general
list-members really have any say in the direction of the projects being carried
forwards at a rapid pace. Mark's company (Labarynth) clearly has a huge leap
forwards in the implementation of a VRML browser, because these are
fundamentally his ideas we are discussing. As such, Mark, and Labarynth
clearly have a lot to gain from the adoption of a "standard" which is based on
(primarily) his work, unless they plan on giving away all they write under the
GNU public licence. He has been honest about this factor, I believe, but I
think it intrudes on the function of a list moderator.

I have to say, I find the notion of resticted "beta versions" of a proposed
"standard" very odd. As I do unannounced negotiations between major
vendors and list moderators with vested commercial interest in the
technology. But this is the nature of the "new" net, and we do live in a
comercial world, and perhaps I am willing to accept it in order to obtain
things which I don't have the time, energy, or is some specific cases, skill, to

Make of this what you will. I'm still deciding what I **think** and please,
excuse my spelling.

-- Mike