Re: Variant spellings in GNU Emacs documentation

[Alan Mackenzie <none@example.invalid>]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@elta.co.il> wrote on 19 Jan 2004 08:27:48 +0200:
>> From: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
>> Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.bug
>> Date: 19 Jan 2004 00:16:30 +0100

>> > Writing "MS-DOG" is a common practice for us--it is not an error.

[ .... ]

>> In addition, it makes one look like a hypocrite if one stresses the
>> importance of using the correct name for systems like GNU/Linux.

> Personally, I don't see anything wrong with testing the sense of humor
> of Emacs users.  Someone once posted an angry message about Antinews on
> similar grounds, but I don't think we must be that dead serious about
> these things.  We can always use a bit of smiling once in a while.

Personally, I don't think it's very funny humour.  When one calls MS-DOS
"MS-DOG" or MS-Windows "windoze", one is holding in contempt not only the
sleazy marketing types at Microsoft, but also the programmers who wrote
these systems.  I think these programmers have done a competent job,
especially considering the constraints they have had to work under.

I am speculating here, but I would think these programmers suffer a good
deal more from MS's business practices than mere users.  Many times, for
example, they will have been forced against their better judgement to do
the Wrong Thing, and this will gnaw away at their consciences and
integrity.  [They might even be forbidden from using Emacs at work :-(]
I don't think they need or deserve the extra slap on the face of having
their creations maligned by other hackers.

> GNU/Linux is different: you don't laugh about the beliefs of people
> whom you respect.

Whom should one respect?  Whom should one despise?

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Munich, Germany)
Email: aacm@muuc.dee; to decode, wherever there is a repeated letter
(like "aa"), remove half of them (leaving, say, "a").