From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Xah Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: emacs-w3m question Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 18:02:26 -0800 (PST) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <7b5a888e-d50f-4061-8854-9832b9330411@o40g2000prn.googlegroups.com> References: <87vdvdu4mp.fsf@literaturlatenight.de> <74160b46-e541-436a-a776-c8bd53d6cd55@o4g2000pra.googlegroups.com> <1f28a20e-0c9f-4478-a85c-27ae40ed7fc9@v16g2000prc.googlegroups.com> <4d476218-bd76-4d41-8a12-1428dfba9e9b@s9g2000prg.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1226025963 28732 80.91.229.12 (7 Nov 2008 02:46:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 02:46:03 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 07 03:47:05 2008 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KyHNI-000865-MN for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 07 Nov 2008 03:47:04 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:32836 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KyHMB-0006eL-BU for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 06 Nov 2008 21:45:55 -0500 Original-Path: news.stanford.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews.google.com!o40g2000prn.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Original-Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help Original-Lines: 61 Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.6.185.159 Original-X-Trace: posting.google.com 1226023347 9621 127.0.0.1 (7 Nov 2008 02:02:27 GMT) Original-X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Original-NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 02:02:27 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: o40g2000prn.googlegroups.com; posting-host=24.6.185.159; posting-account=bRPKjQoAAACxZsR8_VPXCX27T2YcsyMA User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X 10_4_11; en) AppleWebKit/525.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.2 Safari/525.22, gzip(gfe), gzip(gfe) Original-Xref: news.stanford.edu gnu.emacs.help:164206 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:59540 Archived-At: Dear Alan idiot, Xah wrote: > > For example, if your job is data entry, the numerical keypad is much > > more efficient to operate than the numbers on top row of the main keys. Alan Mackenzie wrote: > If your job is programming, and you touch type, the digits on the top row > are much easier to use than the numeric keypad. Isn't it good we've got > this choice! the argument, was about whether the numerical keypad was useless. Here i quote Xavier Maillard: Xavier wrote: =C2=ABAt work, I still have oldies that still do not support these keys. What's more, directional keys are one of the dumbest addition one could have thought off (in my opinion). The same apply for numerical keypad: what are they useful for exactly ? Is it that hard to press shift+& (for the azerty keyboard) to get a 1 ? Or press C-b to move point left ? I do not think so.=C2=BB He, in short, Xavier are idiotic to the degree to claim that the numerical keypads or the physical arrow keys are useless or extremely stupid design. I responded by explaining their applications. Their efficiency for data entry applications when compared to the number keys on the main keyboard. I'm sorry for calling you and Xavier idiots. Perhaps it is insulting, but sometimes that's the best way to make people understand. Most tech geekers are idiots, when they express opinions other than technical details of programing languages. please let me know if you'd like me to respond to more parts of your message. I might give it a swirl. I get annoyed because tech geekers do their bone picking, then other tech geekers sees the part and pitches in. Then pretty soon the whole thread is about tech geekers padding each other's back, and 1+1 seems to be something other than 2. For example, in other part your post, you said something idiotic about the use of Shift key, then Rupert Swarbrick put in 60 words post that effectively says =E2=80=9Cyeah, i still use emacs thru telnet too!!!=E2=80= =9D Can you imagine, soon other tech geeker will chime in and insist emacs is still used thru telnet? and soon more tech geeker will insist that Emacs is not technically a Microsoft Word? O, btw, have you decided on the $50 paypal sincerity contest? I mean, about a month ago, i complained that we had too many debates that went no where in the past year, so perhaps we could pitch in $50 real money so that we have something real to backup our mouths. You didn't respond. But now you are all over me with long winded posts. Is this your sense of tea party? Xah =E2=88=91 http://xahlee.org/ =E2=98=84