From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#46472: Make lisp/mail/uce.el obsolete Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2021 23:12:16 +0200 Message-ID: <83sg5azkr3.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83im6we6v8.fsf@gnu.org> <83mtw8cbku.fsf@gnu.org> <1br1ku3eji.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="11714"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: stefan@marxist.se, 46472@debbugs.gnu.org To: Glenn Morris Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Mar 04 22:13:17 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lHvHV-0002pz-D0 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 22:13:13 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38144 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lHvHU-0006uw-Aq for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 16:13:12 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41656) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lHvHK-0006sp-RA for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 16:13:02 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:48918) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lHvHK-0004V3-Jc for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 16:13:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lHvHK-00085Q-FY for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 16:13:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2021 21:13:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 46472 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 46472-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B46472.161489236731063 (code B ref 46472); Thu, 04 Mar 2021 21:13:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 46472) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Mar 2021 21:12:47 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60464 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lHvH5-00084x-G6 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 16:12:47 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:51982) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lHvH1-00084h-RU for 46472@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 16:12:46 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:42099) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lHvGw-0004Km-9l; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 16:12:38 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:2319 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1lHvGs-00061u-HR; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 16:12:35 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1br1ku3eji.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> (message from Glenn Morris on Thu, 04 Mar 2021 14:27:29 -0500) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:201473 Archived-At: > From: Glenn Morris > Cc: Stefan Kangas , 46472@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2021 14:27:29 -0500 > > Replying to spam is at best pointless, but most likely actively harmful. > Emacs having a package to help you reply to spam is at best pointless, > but most likely actively harmful. Yes, Stefan already said that up-thread. I don't see how our views on what is and isn't appropriate response to spam should be mandatory for the few users who may disagree. This is free software, users are free to do whatever they want with it. Which is also something I already said, so I don't see why do we need to reiterate the same arguments without saying anything new. > This is one of the many things that makes Emacs look antiquated. Why "antiquated"? Is there any other, more modern method we support to respond to spam? > I find the refusal to even obsolete such things demotivating for working > on Emacs. So IMO the cost for keeping such things around is non-zero. I sympathize with your feelings, but feelings aren't limited to one side in a disagreement, and you are not the only one who finds this and similar disputes demotivating. Which is why I think we should try to stay technical and not emotional.