From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: line-move-visual Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2009 10:58:21 +0900 Message-ID: <87iqi0kmki.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <200907092112.21879.jem@iki.fi> <87ws6hupsk.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1247277622 32336 80.91.229.12 (11 Jul 2009 02:00:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2009 02:00:22 +0000 (UTC) Cc: bastienguerry@googlemail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, jem@iki.fi, Miles Bader To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jul 11 04:00:15 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MPRss-0006BK-5y for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 11 Jul 2009 04:00:14 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45800 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MPRsr-0002U9-Gn for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 10 Jul 2009 22:00:13 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MPRsl-0002Sy-MF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jul 2009 22:00:07 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MPRsh-0002S3-NQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jul 2009 22:00:07 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=33594 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MPRsh-0002S0-DS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jul 2009 22:00:03 -0400 Original-Received: from mtps02.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.224]:60420) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MPRsc-00064i-L1; Fri, 10 Jul 2009 21:59:58 -0400 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mtps02.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11CD78210; Sat, 11 Jul 2009 10:59:47 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8D3531A3002; Sat, 11 Jul 2009 10:58:21 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: VM 8.0.12-devo-585 under 21.5 (beta29) "garbanzo" 5bbff3553494 XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:112325 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > However, polling the users is a good way for the maintainers to > learn how users think about a proposed change. The problem is that the pollsters rarely design the poll in a way that encourages thinking at all, let alone conveying the line of thought to the pollster. And pollsters generally just report the numerical results. Eg, the Gentoo poll is actually a sort of non-binding vote, as I understand it. For their purposes, it makes sense to just report numerical results, and they do allow comments. A quick perusal of the comments resulted in zero interesting content beyond the votes (there was a long subthread that depended on the misconception that LaTeX source is divided into paragraphs by newlines, the rest of the comments just reiterated "I do/don't like the feature"). I don't think it is of much interest to the Emacs maintainers. If you want to encourage use of polls, then you should set standards for design and reporting of these polls.