configurable means hard? [was: ... easier explanation how to setup gnus ...]

[Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>]

> But Gnus' defining feature is its configurability, and therefore
> complexity: because it's so complex it's *hard* and you have to be
> able to read the instructions, by and large, to do much that's useful.

Hm.  I hear you, and though not very familiar with Gnus I can
sympathize to some extent with this point of view.

But I think that the goal should be something that (I think) Emacs
achieves pretty well: it is configurable as hell, and it can be as
complex as you like, but it ALSO lets uninformed users pick it up
and start using it right away, out of the box.

Others will disagree, but I think that, yes, you CAN pick up Emacs
and just start using it, in particular if you make use of the menus.
And (others will disagree, but) that is a good thing.

Others will disagree, but I think that it is important that users
be able to access something that can be complex at different levels,
including virtually total ignorance.

It is important to try (TRY, at least) to hide complexity and reveal
it only as needed, on demand.  Users should not NEED to configure
something and grok its innards before they can use it.  They should
BE ABLE to configure it and learn progressively about its guts and
advanced features.

Knowledgable users should be able to fix and reroute the plumbing
at will, but users also deserve some porcelain and should not be
REQUIRED to be plumbers to be able to open the faucet etc.

And yes, I also hear that last qualification you wrote: "to do much
that's useful".  The "much" is relative, however.  A new and naive
user of Emacs can already do a fair amount that is useful, as soon
as s?he opens the box.  Maybe not so useful in the eyes of a more
knowledgable user, but useful all the same.