I'm not serious about that, but I mean to make a point. We have seen a number of posts here criticizing the (lack of) speed of Perl 6 development, and we have also seen a lot of rhetoric discrediting those people based on their lack of contributions.

Some people can contribute, some cannot. Are a person's arguments legitimate only to the exact degree of his contribution? To rephrase, is that which I have said less valid or fair, in and of itself, simply because I have written it instead of someone else?

One could suggest that my lack of contribution has limited my insight and thus caused inaccuracies in my points. Of course that would require one to actually identify, claim, and dismantle inaccuracies.

Alternatively one can just suggest that I have failed to merit a right to make those points in the first place.