From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7ADD51381F3 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 21:46:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D372AE0919; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 21:46:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ee0-f49.google.com (mail-ee0-f49.google.com [74.125.83.49]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BB146E0825 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 21:46:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ee0-f49.google.com with SMTP id d41so609178eek.36 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 14:46:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=A362WYr+T0hS06hiXYrsE5irOqG9g/d2gvvcYhunlfU=; b=eGNZTUnZK98w4C0NwKJSgKhfQDYFiolKYpgnE2KOjIT1CUPPMfLaadSnHqZw3z5fYD N15hODpqa5WXwoxgirf/E+g2u0jD1oI99lzZyD3fZ5m5a3GJh+DEaISSCW6axOoZVKeu 3xMvKD6O/mLFKbtf9DzJyTO/ZmQ2K/SNpp2LEfnvWCRjsnAtiphTVjKVmJ8rmHXFx3lU /EqodypLUwfL0gy72T56pxExnPICDdtWiiYtc/Tol+s2KvLyuIlfHPcO+x8UyeYGYxdb nxhfFGfYqmuSDZMiiY8+U8R5UWsS7FaLBAfCfAabRrxg5VMDnLNUPspGXt+CycWvUbj/ lSmw== X-Received: by 10.15.99.133 with SMTP id bl5mr7127536eeb.92.1375307164204; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 14:46:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.20.0.41] (196-210-102-70.dynamic.isadsl.co.za. [196.210.102.70]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id e44sm436158eeh.11.2013.07.31.14.46.02 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 31 Jul 2013 14:46:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51F984FD.2010505@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 23:43:25 +0200 From: Alan McKinnon User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130709 Thunderbird/17.0.7 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation References: <3017.1375206780@ccs.covici.com> <6349.1375221843@ccs.covici.com> <51F8F63E.9020705@libertytrek.org> <20130731132227.5e582ee7@digimed.co.uk> <51F9034E.7040204@libertytrek.org> <51F92CC0.2060504@libertytrek.org> <51F9480E.3080406@gmail.com> <51F952C3.7070903@gmail.com> <4C426CD4-518B-490A-BF5F-97286FF773E6@stellar.eclipse.co.uk> <51F967BE.4080704@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: a9b645be-ca21-4daf-b710-1052280d37d6 X-Archives-Hash: 0abff7dbb1e1a230580361a30559a9ce On 31/07/2013 23:22, Stroller wrote: > > On 31 July 2013, at 20:38, Alan McKinnon wrote: >>> ... >>> Heck! Even according to yourself, in the same email, I'm not understanding it wrong! >>> >>> >>> I've asked you this before - would you stop wrongly telling people they're wrong, please? >>> >>> Would you please just stop and think "could it be me who is misunderstanding this?" >>> >>> Could you please just rephrase yourself "I think you may be mistaken". >>> >>> Whenever it is *you* who is mistaken, you are always assertively and authoritatively so. >>> >>> This makes it harder for people to question or challenge you, and it ensures those you misadvise will waste their time with greater determination. "Well, Alan knows what he's on about, and he said this definitely - there was no doubt in his statement". >>> >>> Not only that, it's just plain annoying to be told one is wrong when one is not. >> >> >> Sure, I can do that. >> >> I read "that there will be files installed to /etc/init.d/ that don't >> actually do anything" different to what you intended. English can be >> very ambiguous. >> >> If we take "You are understanding it wrong." out of my mail is the rest OK? > > The problem with the rest of that message was that, although accurate, it stemmed from the assumption that someone else must have misunderstood. > > A similar explanation had already been given in this thread - I'd read that, and that's why I was responding. > > Had you instead asked "what do you mean?" or "why does that bother you?" you would have given me the opportunity to clarify. > > Had I shown a misunderstanding upon further elaboration, that would been your opportunity to demonstrate your wisdom. > > Everyone here respects your knowledge and experience, it just feels like you're in such a rush to be helpful that you assume someone else must've screwed up. This might sound a bit weird, but I type like I speak. I never developed a distinct writing style different from a spoken style, and people who know me in person comment on it often. And I don't proof-read enough either. My bad. I don't have any of these problems with face-to-face conversation, but it doesn't work too good over email. I'm not unaware of how I probably come across, and I'm working on it. Admittedly I'm not having a huge amount of success just yet, but I am working on it. Several smart folk tell me it takes time. Are we OK on this for now, or is there more to discuss? -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckinnon@gmail.com