All of the arguments why Pharo is Smalltalk are correct. Let me tell you a story... My friends and I are planning a trip to Spain. I am explaining that in Spanish, "yo" - which means "hi" in English slang - means "l". They are arguing passionately that "yo" means "hi" and presenting evidence upon evidence to prove it. Then I snap back that, no, "yo" definitely means "I". Ridiculous, right? Sounds kind of like a Monty Python skit. Well, Pharo is planning a trip to the programming world of non-Smalltalkers. I am explaining that in Ruby, "Smalltalk" - which means "a language with a development environment written in itself which both were designed to continually evolve*" in the Smalltalk community - means "Smalltalk-80". My friends are arguing passionately that "Smalltalk" means the former and presenting evidence upon evidence to prove it. Both of these disagreements fail to take into account that truth is contextual and language imprecise. So please, please, please, please, please, no more theses on why Pharo is Smalltalk, or why it's not. It's neither, and both, and more! We're talking about effectively marketing to non-Smalltalkers, and our theory (only time will tell) is: for our first initial sound bite, Smalltalk-inspired (or silent about Smalltalk, which I think may be even better) will be more intention revealing to the target audience than Smalltalk. Either way, we're going to have to do some more explaining if they're interested in hearing more. But with the first, maybe, they will be interested in hearing more before being turned off by a preconceived (and incomplete) notion of what "Smalltalk" is. But there is a valid question here of how to manage the inevitable misunderstandings... I'll posted some ideas for that in a bit... ----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-is-Smalltalk-and-Not-tp4757342.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.