>> Ah, the power of denial. I can think of a few texts that describe you
>> perfectly - I think you'd find them anything but 'tone free'. There is
>> no tone-free text.
> There's plenty of tone free text. Apparently though, there are very few
> tone free readers.
No, the organisation of text by its very nature represents the state of mind
(or minds) of its author(s). This is true for all communicative texts,
including source code.
> Tone-free doesn't change the meaning of words.
Amen. So even on that score, calling me anal-retentive simply because you
didn't see my point of view _immediately_ - does that still seem like a good
idea to you? If you want a constructive debate, don't insult people.
> But, I have noted that you simply called the idea idiotic rather than
> calling me personally idiotic here. Being someone who can actually read
> things tone free, I'm not offended, since I'm capable of accepting that
> you have an opinion different from me about the idea. See, I'm actually
> capable of not being offended because you're challenging my idea, even if
> "moronic and short-sighted" doesn't tell me *why* it is, the one thing
> I've been asking for this whole time.
Right, you're able to do this now, under fire. If I had responded to you
like that out-of-the-blue, it's a good bet you'd have been seriously
... as you shoulda been - calling the idea 'moronic' very much suggests
you're an idiot for thinking of it, and more importantly for not realising
it as it was being discussed.
Of course the idea isn't moronic, your arrogance is. You're obviously not
aware of it, take it on board.
>> For someone who thinks of their 'oversight' ability as highly as you
>> do, it's utterly bizarre how you can't see how idiotic it actually is.
> Tell me - where did I say I think highly of 'oversight' ability in myself?
> I don't even know what you mean by this.
You seem to regularly set yourself up as the developer mouthpiece of the
Rockbox project on this list, and the way you arbitrate ideas frequently
implies that you consider yourself an authority on the overall direction of
I've no idea what your responsibilities here are, and I don't care - I
require respect in all my communications with people, and they get it from
me as a matter of course.
> I recognize that people disagree with me. I asked (several times) for more
> information. Seriously, I'm not trying to argue them into agreeing with
> me - it's rather clear they won't. I'm trying to understand all the facets
> of their side. I don't need people to agree with me. I just need to make
> up my own mind on the issue, and that's all that I'm here for. I have
> absolutely no reason to try to convince them. Opinions like "I don't like
> it" don't tell me why it's a bad idea, they just reiterate again and again
> what was said early on - that they don't like it.
See, now there is the first decent paragraph - I have no problem with that
at all. Shame that it took me being abusive, and several people
complaining, before it happened.
It's safe to assume that almost _everybody_ here is interested in
cooperation, and improving things - that's what software development is all
about. I think everybody is fine with debate, and sorting out good from bad
ideas. In the end it's all about tone Paul.
Received on 2009-06-20