From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: EmacsW32 invocation options Date: Wed, 02 May 2007 22:46:13 +0200 Message-ID: <4638F895.2030907@gmail.com> References: <59osrdF2m97hgU1@mid.individual.net> <87ejlzjv27.fsf@gmail.com> <4638A094.8090708@gmail.com> <4638A852.3010004@gmail.com> <4638B13B.5050807@gmail.com> <4638F18B.7090703@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1178138809 11895 80.91.229.12 (2 May 2007 20:46:49 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 2 May 2007 20:46:49 +0000 (UTC) Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, Hadron To: Juanma Barranquero Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed May 02 22:46:48 2007 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 1HjLin-0005xA-7z for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 02 May 2007 22:46:45 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HjLpE-0006fE-K5 for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 02 May 2007 16:53:24 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HjLol-000619-B4 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 02 May 2007 16:52:55 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HjLoj-0005xz-HJ for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 02 May 2007 16:52:54 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HjLoj-0005xQ-9t for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 02 May 2007 16:52:53 -0400 Original-Received: from ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net ([80.76.149.212]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1HjLiG-0007re-VU for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 02 May 2007 16:46:13 -0400 Original-Received: from c83-254-145-24.bredband.comhem.se ([83.254.145.24]:65017 helo=[127.0.0.1]) by ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HjLiF-0006lE-3n; Wed, 02 May 2007 22:46:11 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.3) Gecko/20070326 Thunderbird/2.0.0.0 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666 In-Reply-To: X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 000737-2, 2007-04-30), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Scan-Result: No virus found in message 1HjLiF-0006lE-3n. X-Scan-Signature: ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net 1HjLiF-0006lE-3n 078e83760d853eac28d7b94abc7ef8f5 X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.6? (barebone, rare!) 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:43533 Archived-At: Juanma Barranquero wrote: > On 5/2/07, Lennart Borgman (gmail) wrote: >> Juanma Barranquero wrote: > >> And so is sound reasoning without personal attachs. > > Rest assured I haven't attacked you. > > You think that explaining the feeling I get from your webpage is an > attack. It's not. I cannot read your mind, but I have no trouble > whatsoever reading mine. Reading ones own mind is also about understanding where the feelings come from. And about acting/reacting/contemplating. Maybe you think I am saying to much above but I really have found some of your comments strange. > I think that saying that the Emacs developers did not take the time to > discuss rationally or in deep what you wanted to do, or asking again > and again to people who disagrees with you whether they have read your > webpages, or messages in a discussion thread, instead of assuming that > they *have* read it and just *do* disagree... that seems like a > personal attack to me, yes. I am not the one who brings up this discussion. I would prefer to be silent if I did not find the comments destructive.