RE: d-s-m default: Nil + explanation!

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

> This proposal was basically shouted down with "I want
> delete-selection-mode for all and won't accept less", and 
> with polemics of the "even the simplest editing" kind.

Hm. You keep saying that. And you've tried to give the impression that it is I
whom you are quoting, that I've insisted on d-s-mode for all.

That's not my position, and it never has been. _No one_ has supported such a
position. It's just another of your straw men. You are quoting no one, trying to
rewrite la petite histoire, populating it with monsters of your imagination.

And no one has shouted you down. Is it OK for anyone to disagree with you?

My position is:

 I'm OK with leaving the default as it is, though I
 think it would help more people if we implemented
 Juri's proposal.

I made it clear that while I think d-s-mode as the default might be a good idea,
it is better to leave d-s-mode unmolested, as an option, and _not_ to make it
the default, than would be to mess up d-s-mode in a misguided attempt to "fix"
it.

And I was clear that if lots of pain would be inflicted on users if d-s-mode
were the default, then we should not make it the default. And:

 I think we've already effectively moved on, saying that
 d-s-mode as is is not quite the right default.

I agreed explicitly with Richard (and others) that:

 If we change the default, we don't have to use
 `delete-selection-mode'. We could use something different
 for this purpose if it is more suitabe."

So please stop with the straw men and crying victim. No bullies have shouted you
down.  AFAIK, your proposal is still being considered. If (_IF_) in the end it
doesn't get quite the response you'd like, that's not because anyone has shouted
you down.