On 10 Dec 2022, at 22:46, Lassi Kortela <xxxxxx@lassi.io> wrote:

>> I strongly disagree and would like to politely request that you not use the mailing list for this SRFI to discuss your views on the issue of the SRFI process in general.
>
> I'm afraid I don't respect your sentiment. I've spared no effort to help the process and the result is incomprehension and disdain. Wrong list; wrong tone; who invited you here; we like our stuff the way it is; etc.
>
> Anyone else who's come along, and who will come along in the future to raise similar concerns will receive a similar response. That's the real problem. When it comes to big picture thinking, all this community can muster is to shoot the messenger.

I am the author of this SRFI and would prefer that the mailing list for this SRFI remain on-topic: discussing matters specifically related to this SRFI.

I’m well aware of the objections you’ve made elsewhere. I don’t agree with them, but I also don’t object to you discussing them in forums such as scheme-reports-wg2 and srfi-discuss where more general procedural questions are more relevant. Please keep this list on topic.

Daphne