Hello
The answer is written in the same way a preast used to (or may be still) talk to the non-believing people.
I am chocked by an aswer that in such a way tries to demonstrate power by using no arguments other that we are silly and has not read the document approprieately.
I feel the person that is responsible for the document as well as the answer should be invited to next IFIP TC6 meeting to learn us how to read the bible correctly and how to beleive correctly.
As was stated in another mail. The "new IPIF" lacks analysis of the present situation. In the academic conference business we are competing with IEEE, ACM etc. But broadeing the scope of new IFIP will have us meet a jungle of new organisations to compete with. And where is the (free) manpower to broaden the scope? Where is the analysis? There is only an answer: a marketing person. I am not surprised if "IFIP" knows the marketing person already.
Best regards from Finn Arve...
----- Original Message ----- From: "Otto Spaniol" spaniol@informatik.rwth-aachen.de To: ifip-tc6@informatik.rwth-aachen.de Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 3:34 PM Subject: [ifip-tc6] The "document"
Dear Dipak and all others,
Could you please send me the document you sent to Basie?
With best regards Dipak
Here is the document. I believed that I had sent it to the delegates, too. The documents consists of the pages produced by Guy L. and Harry P. at the occasion of the meeting - in a slightly "moderated" form.
Would you please check and give comments by comparing with the "New IFIP" document which you received some time ago (it is also part of the meeting documents of Coimbra). We will have to save the honour of TC6. We have been denoted as "unacademic and as unscientific".
Best regards Otto
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ifip-tc6 mailing list ifip-tc6@lists.RWTH-Aachen.DE http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/ifip-tc6