Call for Interest: Clojure (or Lisp?) Code Camp with BLM focus

Dave Cooper david.cooper at
Wed Dec 2 20:03:49 UTC 2020

I'll also note that Kenny's initial posting was just trying to drum up
interest in this music coding idea from individuals he respects in this
mailing list which happens to be a common-lisp one; fair enough. But even
Kenny suggested having the actual discussion elsewhere  (he suggested
google groups) since the topic is broader than the nominal topic of this
mailing list.

To the extent the discussion here does revolve around CL (e.g. the plug for
Opus Modus) then I would say by all means let's keep that part of the
discussion here.

On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 2:57 PM Dave Cooper <david.cooper at>

> Well i'm not meaning to be a wet blanket but I'm pretty sure there are
> plenty of places to discuss "this language is better than that language
> because of this or that feature"   other than a common lisp - specific
> email list.
> It seems self-evident to me that a "professional common lisp" mailing list
> is meant for those who are working in Common Lisp professionally (either
> out of necessity or preference), and wish to discuss various
> tips/tricks/practicalities of continuing to do so.  Discussions about how
> to introduce Common Lisp to youngsters (some of whom may become the next
> generation of "common lisp professionals") may also be appropriate. But
> discussions about "hey, let's teach youngsters programming: now let's
> discuss what non-commonlisp trendy languages are the cool/smart kids using
> these days so that we (common lisp professional) may put resources into a
> coding camp or whatever"  seem to run counter to any purpose of a mailing
> list such as this and moreover smacks of a cuckoldish mentality.
> Now, if we are discussing other languages from the perspective of "how can
> we co-opt some of the nice features of these other languages into common
> lisp through open-source libraries or some future version of the cl
> standard" then I feel the discussion would be appropriate here. But that
> does not seem to be the thrust of this current thread (is it?)
> I also should display some humility and perhaps my initial comment on this
> matter was a bit short and haughty; I apologize if it came through that
> way. After all, I did not establish this list and I'm not sure who did --
> if they are still around perhaps they can chime in with an opinion?
> I am however associated with the Foundation which runs
> which runs this mailing list so I do feel qualified to express an opinion
> here.
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 2:24 PM Laughing Water <lw at> wrote:
>> I occupy a very humble position in the Common Lisp community, but FWIW I
>> think it’s reasonable to either include or exclude this discussion from
>> this list. It’s a subject of interest to the CL professional community but
>> it’s more about Lisp or Lisp-like offshoots or alternatives than about CL
>> itself.
>> My only request would be that if this discussion moves elsewhere, I’d
>> like to know where it goes so I can follow it.
>> Best wishes,
>> Laughing Water
>> On Dec 2, 2020, at 11:40 AM, Dave Cooper <david.cooper at>
>> wrote:
>> May I respectfully suggest that you guys take this non-CL discussion
>> elsewhere than the "professional common lisp" mailing list.
>> --
>> My Best,
>> Dave Cooper, david.cooper at
>> +1 248-330-2979
> --
> My Best,
> Dave Cooper, david.cooper at
> +1 248-330-2979

My Best,

Dave Cooper, david.cooper at,
+1 248-330-2979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the pro mailing list