RE: 2014 Sports Proposal - V3

1) I did not take the comments from Peter as negative. On the contrary, he is making good points from my perspective of someone developing a sport ontology for EBU based on IOC ODP results that we receive during sport events that we contractually cover.

2) But maybe the way it goes is an expression of frustration on how works. I remember last time I saw something about sport was someone from bing saying in substance "thanks for the requirements, I am taking them and going away to work on a solution". So it seems that it went beyond the work on role. Not so encouraging to see a group of people working in the background and suddenly announcing "here it is" and finally not consider actually useful comments.

If this were os perfect as it is, I must admit I wouldn't know how to express results - a bit of a missing piece for sports, or? 


-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Bergman [] 
Sent: mercredi 18 juin 2014 06:51
Subject: Re: 2014 Sports Proposal - V3


Systems like will either be coherent on their own, or others will take advantage of their discrete vocabulary (if they are even used at all) to provide their own coherence.

Peter's goading and observations have been (I think, importantly) geared to the questions of consistency, usability and coherence of the structure.

There is no need to take criticism of possible (and, I believe, empirically demonstrable) shortcomings in or its proposals as personal or "egotism" comments. Peter has commented a few times on some issues in the sports sections in the past. Attempts to shame Peter not to make such comments does not provide any benefits to the long-term usability of

There is nothing personal here. is nothing more than a structure-in-development.

Please keep the deignings and the "come on, mans" in your back pockets. 
Maybe there is something to learn here. ;)


On 6/17/2014 10:48 PM, Thad Guidry wrote:
> Peter,
> Tom is right, and all too often, we have seen a bit of egotism from 
> you in past emails as well to the group.
> We would expect a bit better behavior from a published author such as 
> yourself.
> Come on man.
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 10:35 PM, Tom Morris < 
> <>> wrote:
>     On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 11:19 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider
>     < <>> wrote:
>         I think that these questions and concerns need to be addressed
>         before the
>         proposal can be considered to be mature.
>     Or before you'll even deign to offer substantive comments with
>     suggestions for improvements?
>     Tom
> --
> -Thad
> +ThadGuidry <>
> Thad on LinkedIn <>


Michael K. Bergman
CEO  Structured Dynamics LLC



This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by the mailgateway

Received on Wednesday, 18 June 2014 09:21:12 UTC