Netiquette [Was: Re: pmount could perhaps be of greater utility?
On 07.05.19 07:38, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote off-list:
> On Tuesday, May 07, 2019 12:01:49 AM Erik Christiansen wrote:
> > only the author is dumb enough
>
> Why use language like that? (It does not contribute to the welcoming
> environment that I'd like to see cultivated here.)
>
> Aside: I've replied privately, but I would like to reply publically (sp?) in
> order to spread the message, but only if you feel comfortable with that (which
> I don't expect you will).)
If my judgemental wording has offended the author on the other list,
then I will admit to careless use of language. The out-of-the-blue shot
across my bow from David, using that awkwardly and unproductively
constructed use case looked like a deliberate straw man attack, coming
hot on the heels of a deprecation attempt. Where a shell provides syntax
alternatives, all still documented and supported, it may be perceived as
unwelcoming and unproductive to spontaneously hound one usage in favour
of one's own bias. Still, it would be better if my response had been more
sanguine.
Erik
P.S. s/publically/publicly (Yep, spellchecking in Vim in Mutt is OK
with that. Caveat: I use a British
dictionary. Haven't checked for possible USA
divergent spelling.)
--
Time is a great teacher, but unfortunately it kills all its pupils.
- Hector Louis Berlioz
Reply to: