when rational discussion was still a possibility

[bowerbird]

michel said:
>   If you want to start a discussion about that new
>   Markdown-related thing making rounds on the internet

i don't want to start such a discussion.

but i find it very perplexing that so many of the people here --
who i assume are here because they _care_ about markdown
-- would allow themselves to be diverted by a topic as trivial
as _tables_ when the internet at large is more-or-less talking
about the evolution of the future of this format/tool/whatever.


>   how about asking for opinions about it?

anybody who wanted to express an opinion about the "new"
thing could have done it here last month, when john posted it
to this listserve, and rational discussion was still a possibility.

which is certainly not true in the zoo which has since ensued.


>   instead of writing poetic elephant analogies

i am a poet, so if you meant that as a dig, well, it didn't work.


>   and subtle meta-complains

what exactly was "subtle" about my complaint?  nothing at all.

i mean, it's certainly possible that the initial poster was unaware
of the large kerfluffel surrounding markdown out on the internet,
because a healthy disregard for the social media is... healthy...
but certainly _some_ of you had to have some knowledge of it.

and yet everybody is just going about your "business as usual".


>    No one bothered announcing the news here

yes, that was one of my points.


>   so no one is discussing it here.

yes, that was another one of my points.


>   If you think it's worth a discussion, start one.

i think there are a whole raft of questions that are
being obscured by this battle of personalities which
are worthy of discussion and -- indeed -- _should_
be discussed in a healthy dialog involving all sides.

but i also have _more_ than enough experience to
know that such a discussion will never happen here.

i am also aware that even if it _could_ happen here,
it'll never be the case that _i_ would be permitted to
"start" it. that's not something an outsider is allowed.

(but hey, if you want to play, chew on this for a bit:
could we eliminate ambiguities and inconsistencies,
while still retaining the flexibility that gruber desires?
and if so, how exactly would we go about doing that?
here's a good hint: do not let atwood lead the effort.)


>   But please don't start it by complaining
>   how unacceptable it is that it isn't already
>   being discussed, it's quite uninviting.

i didn't say it was "unacceptable".

i accepted, a long time ago, that _nothing_ of substance
will ever happen on this listserve.  and i'm fine with that.

but when _nothing_ happens in such a noticeable way,
i'm gonna notice it, and i'm also gonna comment on it.
because that's what an outsider does.

-bowerbird