From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs contributions, C and Lisp Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 13:56:30 +0100 Organization: Organization?!? Message-ID: <877g8f2y69.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> References: <8338j717oe.fsf@gnu.org> <87zjlf6tdx.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <83sir7yue7.fsf@gnu.org> <8761o3dlak.fsf@wanadoo.es> <83bnxuzyl4.fsf@gnu.org> <871tyqes5q.fsf@wanadoo.es> <834n3lzux6.fsf@gnu.org> <87ppm9d3y4.fsf@wanadoo.es> <83ob1ty4qr.fsf@gnu.org> <87ha7lcxki.fsf@wanadoo.es> <83ios0xwcv.fsf@gnu.org> <87bnxscr0x.fsf@wanadoo.es> <83eh2oxpnw.fsf@gnu.org> <877g8gcl52.fsf@wanadoo.es> <871tyn4n1l.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <531054E2.6040200@dancol.org> <87k3cf3601.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <8738j3cxpd.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87bnxr32zw.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87txbjbfjn.fsf@wanadoo.es> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1393592229 9490 80.91.229.3 (28 Feb 2014 12:57:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 12:57:09 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Feb 28 13:57:17 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WJN08-0003lS-6N for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 13:57:16 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50803 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WJN07-00036c-TK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 07:57:15 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34725) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WJN00-00036A-1i for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 07:57:13 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WJMzr-0006Iq-PA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 07:57:07 -0500 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:40867) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WJMzr-0006IY-IU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 07:56:59 -0500 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WJMzm-0002Yd-Db for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 13:56:54 +0100 Original-Received: from x2f43b62.dyn.telefonica.de ([2.244.59.98]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 13:56:54 +0100 Original-Received: from dak by x2f43b62.dyn.telefonica.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 13:56:54 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 25 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: x2f43b62.dyn.telefonica.de X-Face: 2FEFf>]>q>2iw=B6, xrUubRI>pR&Ml9=ao@P@i)L:\urd*t9M~y1^:+Y]'C0~{mAl`oQuAl \!3KEIp?*w`|bL5qr,H)LFO6Q=qx~iH4DN; i"; /yuIsqbLLCh/!U#X[S~(5eZ41to5f%E@'ELIi$t^ Vc\LWP@J5p^rst0+('>Er0=^1{]M9!p?&:\z]|;&=NP3AhB!B_bi^]Pfkw User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:Rw8FVQxOyG/LzhMVJmFcuqO1s3s= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 80.91.229.3 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:169940 Archived-At: Óscar Fuentes writes: > David Kastrup writes: > >> Yes, that's inflammatory and almost libelous. Because it is a summary >> of something that can hardly be read in any way that is _not_ >> inflammatory and almost libelous. Feel free to point out any other >> valid reading of it, even though it could lead to a continuation of a >> discussion you want to stop. > > Eli took no offense from my response. That should be a strong hint for > you. Eli did not reply after you unilaterally declared the discussion closed. Declaring this to mean that he took no offense is quite a leap. You did not bother explaining how any of the post I quoted from you could be interpreted in any other way than I did. In fact, you completely cut out again all of that quote from your reply. I don't see that it makes sense to criticize my interpretation of your words without viewing what you wrote. -- David Kastrup