Spelling style on MLs

[Michael]

Am Fri, 08 Nov 2013 10:32:36 +0000
schrieb Anne Wilson <cannewilson at googlemail.com>:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On 05/11/2013 14:27, Michael wrote:
> > Am Fri, 01 Nov 2013 17:40:40 +0000 schrieb Anne Wilson
> > <cannewilson at googlemail.com>:
> > 
> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
> >> 
> >> On 01/11/2013 15:30, Michael wrote:
> >>> What I doubt, is that all are absolutely "fine" and "happy"
> >>> with his style.
> >> 
> >> Please stop assuming that you answer for others.  Clearly you
> >> don't.
> > 
> > Huh? I never said I answer for others, I just *assume* stuff and I 
> > *think* others might be a tad or more annoyed, period. I am not
> > the spokesman of all others here, I am just one single guy thinking
> > he is (mostly) "right". And I guess you think you are right too. So
> > where is the difference? That we disagree and only your point can
> > be true?
> > 
> The difference is simple.

We'll see about that. ;-)


> You "assume" you know what people think.

Wrong. I assume I know how most / many feel there. The most important
thing to realize there: I *assume*! And I don't get why you have a
problem with that. Second, I may be wrong or I may be right. You think I
am wrong, I think I am right. Live and let live, eh? Third, I did never
say I *know* how folks think or feel, let alone how *all* folks may
think / feel / whatever. I said "most" and that should be read as "more
than 50% of users here". And even if it would be only 40 or 30% feel
more or less unhappy with that kind of style, I bet it would still be
more than users just being outright happy with it and enjoying it,
which would still mean "most" are unhappy in a mathematical sense (the
biggest group of users == most). And from what I read from most users
that said something here I get the feeling I am right. Maybe they would
not use the word "annoyed" as it might sound to harsh or strong, but I
do. Is that the issue here, that you think that word is too strong?

> I
> know without a doubt that people are individuals, and there is no way
> of generalising about them.

Sure people are individuals, but we *all* breath, eat, sleep (well...).
Most of us have two legs, two arms, one head. Many of us drink coffee
or tea, some of us neither. Some may even smoke. And I *assume* when it
comes to long redundant and repetitive texts that go "too" deep, many /
most humans tend to get annoyed / unhappy in general. I can't prove
the last part, that's why I just assume / guess so. Anyway, I guess I
can generalize here a great deal, you don't, fine with me.


> There's no more to be said about this.

I beg to differ... but I wouldn't mind either way.

Michael
___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.