Michael Collins wrote:
<snip>
You wrote in your reply to Woody: "Do you hear yourself btw?" I can ask
you the same question: Do you hear yourself? You act as if some subjects
are taboo in this list.

Taboos aren't really the issue. Spending valuable time and energy in unfruitful debates is an issue.
People at times have been accused of various different things in this list just because they dared to ask something! And all you have to say is that this is an unfruitful debate?

For me the whole debate is VERY fruitful if the next user who dares to mention the dreaded word "performance" is spared the irony and the bashing.

> If you decide to reply again, please limit the length of your post.
>
>
Now it is the size of my posts that troubles you? I've seen longer posts
in the list and you didn't complain.
Brevity is the essence of communication - I highly recommend it.

Then, please recommend it to all cases and not just in my case.

Tony's reply was not so brief either, so, please go ahead and say the same to him. That is, only if you care to appear impartial.

Me on the other hand, I'd prefer an actual reply to my arguments, instead of dismissing the entire discussion for the sake of brevity. Up to now I have seen more evasion tactics than arguments against the points I've made.


-MC

P.S. - Just a clarification: Using SIPp is a "fake" test to do 200/400/600/xxx calls per second. Getting thousands of actual humans making actual calls is a "real" test. In other words, since SIPp can only do so much its test results are of limited value in the real world.
Really, is this what a "fake" test is? Because I thought that it was a test that never actually happened. English is not my native language, but at least I know that much.

What you wrote in your P.S. is so wrong in so many ways. For the "sake of brevity" I will only say that it is a bad attempt to cover Tony's rude reply to a list user and I'll leave it at that for the moment.

Otherwise we will have to get in a discussion of what a test is, what is a "real" as opposed to a "fake" test and whether sipp or test tools in general have limited value in the real world. I don't have a problem with long discussions, but is seems they are not favored in this context so I'll pass for the moment, until the circumstances require it.

 

Perhaps you should add a size restriction directive in the mailing list
policy, along with a "no performance questions allowed" directive. That
should clear things up significantly.
Would you be willing just to let the subject go? I think everyone is tired of this thread.
Tired? Now you can speak for "everyone"? I know quite a few people who are actually reading this thread with lots of interest.

Sure, I'm willing to let go... Are you?

Have a great weekend,
Vlasis.