Re: [kde] Spelling style on MLs
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 05/11/2013 14:27, Michael wrote: Am Fri, 01 Nov 2013 17:40:40 + schrieb Anne Wilson cannewil...@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. You assume you know what people think. I know without a doubt that people are individuals, and there is no way of generalising about them. There's no more to be said about this. Anne -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlJ8vcIACgkQj93fyh4cnBcziQCfd3lYxnr0bsX7oAo4hMu4F/6m IKIAn3UKJWykt3KHnsJcZWeMBIhoeZyo =UpAK -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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.
Re: [kde] Spelling style on MLs (was: KDE's rough edges... what are your experiences?)
On Wednesday 30 October 2013 21:59 Frank Steinmetzger wrote: That's composition. Spelling is their/there/they're. Actually, that's grammar. And now I'll STFU ;) -- Med venlig hilsen / Best Regards Thomas Tanghus ___ 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.
Re: [kde] Spelling style on MLs
Am Fri, 01 Nov 2013 17:40:40 + schrieb Anne Wilson cannewil...@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? 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.
Re: [kde] Spelling style on MLs (was: KDE's rough edges... what are your experiences?)
On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 03:59:00PM +0100, Michael wrote: That's composition. ;-) Spelling is their/there/they're. Oops, then either the dictionary / wordbook used (dict.leo.org) is somewhat inaccurate or I use the german word Schreibstil wrong. :) I had English advanced classes in Grammar school, and exams were split into comprehension (understanding text) and composition (writing text). I got that word from there. Either way, what I tried to express there was the style one uses when writing. I don't think that went amiss. :) -- Gruß | Greetings | Qapla’ Please do not share anything from, with or about me with any Facebook service. “An itching nose must be scratched.” … Kosh (Star Wreck) signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ 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.
Re: [kde] Spelling style on MLs (was: KDE's rough edges... what are your experiences?)
Am Thu, 31 Oct 2013 12:40:04 +0100 schrieb Myriam Schweingruber myr...@kde.org: Hi Michael, On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 8:44 PM, Michael michael.the.optim...@gmail.com wrote: Am Tue, 29 Oct 2013 16:20:15 + (UTC) schrieb Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net: Michael posted on Mon, 28 Oct 2013 14:59:12 +0100 as excerpted: ... Most of the time I simply skip what Duncan writes, as it usually doesn't help me personally, but he sure has a great amount of knowledge. No doubts about his knowledge. And I am fine with your level of tolerance when it comes to his writing style and of course what you do with it. As I am new on this list, I have no idea how often he answers your questions or if you even ask here questions. But that you tend to ignore / skip his mails entirely does tell me a lot about how much you like his exuberant mails. ;-) Still, that you do NOT complain about it is your choice. I did just choose differently, that's it. If it annoys you, just don't read it? You don't have to. Well, that does not scale well if I explicitly ask others about their opinion about a rather controversial subject. It is hard enough to accept a thread in the lines of KDE sucks in your own home-yard, to simply ignore some of the opinions and answers given would be just rude and (possibly) detrimental to the whole thing too. @Duncan: maybe a (very short) section of tl::dr at the top of your mails could be useful for many, instead of burying the essential information in the length of the mail. Hum... it sure looks like you like his mails, you even found time to think about a possible solution. Chances are, because you are annoyed. Even if just a bit. While I know my way around in searching and diagonal reading long texts, most people will have a hard time trying to extract the relevant information, so why not put the important stuff in a 3-liner at the top, and keep the rest for those who enjoy reading you? Well, his texts are not only long, they are *needlessly* long! Sure, one could accept that another guy goes two steps up, and one step down, two steps up and one step down while walking stairs. But he could talk to that guy too and try to convince him of doing just one step at a time up when walking the stairs. That would be more economical for the stair-walking guy and the one watching does not go crazy while watching. He might even opt in to not watch at all at some point. ;-) Anyway, I don't see any problem others might have understanding his texts, they are just repetitive and overly detailed. Finding the small pieces of information one seeks is not hard, it is just needlessly time-consuming... and thus: annoying. regards 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.
Re: [kde] Spelling style on MLs
-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. Anne -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlJz55YACgkQj93fyh4cnBfqgQCeLfqzhBQGE/IqVTr25czzIZ60 2bwAoIXkNHGDJP7bTtUoJEUxqHVkSifZ =id8W -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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.
Re: [kde] Spelling style on MLs
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 30/10/2013 19:44, Michael wrote: I guess most people are somewhere in between, skimming/reading my epistles with varying degrees of impatience. I doubt that! :-) I guess most are at least annoyed to a certain degree, but most do not care enough to do anything about it either. Ignorance is a bliss, which I don't possess apparently. ;-) Doubt away! I skim Duncan's replies, but when you need it, his depth of information is invaluable. Many people have cause to thank him. Early last century one Dale Carnegie wrote a book called How to win friends and influence people. Perhaps you should read it. Anne -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlJyJKkACgkQj93fyh4cnBfd6ACdHiD33SuG7OnHB8GGqAuVO+ya QbcAn3O+34WSq83HD18LRcbJ+gzki9aZ =V9rK -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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.
Re: [kde] Spelling style on MLs (was: KDE's rough edges... what are your experiences?)
Myriam Schweingruber posted on Thu, 31 Oct 2013 12:40:04 +0100 as excerpted: @Duncan: maybe a (very short) section of tl::dr at the top of your mails could be useful for many, instead of burying the essential information in the length of the mail. Thanks. I mentioned elsewhere but you probably missed it. I'm /trying/ to develop the tl;dr summary habit where size suggests I should use it, as I agree it's a (the?) reasonable compromise, but at present I'm afraid I miss it more often than I include it. =:^\ -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master. Richard Stallman ___ 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.
[kde] Spelling style on MLs (was: KDE's rough edges... what are your experiences?)
Am Tue, 29 Oct 2013 16:20:15 + (UTC) schrieb Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net: Michael posted on Mon, 28 Oct 2013 14:59:12 +0100 as excerpted: Hell! Don't take it the wrong way, but I strongly suggest you rethink your way of communicating on mailinglists. You went in such lengths in absolutely unrelated topics and even with slightly related topics you went by far, far, far, far to deep. It was really no pleasure at all to read it all, which I had to as courtesy demands it, as I did ask for feedback. And what I took from your 25.457 characters in 441 lines and 4270 words would fit in roundabout 10-20 lines. FWIW, I'm aware of the situation, and/but... Nice to hear, really! I do in fact have quite a collection of thanks from people who find my essays useful enough to thank me, and in some cases, to actually have a Duncan folder where they save those essays for further reference. =:^) I can see that *deep* and exuberant all-embracing mails may have some benefits for some topics / audiences + simple chit-chat where the direction of a given topic might shift, intentionally or not, but on a technical and rather specific mailing list... not so much. If arbitrary folks on a mailing list appreciate those exuberant mails, it might just indicate how little they know about a topic and they consider your mails as some sort of FAQ or overall information sheet. For a lack of knowledge, books, wikis, documentation do exist. Most mailing lists are just the wrong medium for that and as it might annoy many folks: Don't do it! You know, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of a few... OTOH, I'm also aware that some people find them intolerable, to the point of killfiling me -- which I'm OK with as I've always considered killfiling an absolute right on the net (that being one of the reasons I prefer newsgroups and mailing lists to web forums, where killfiling is often not possible), no reason needed, and in fact IMO it's often better no reason given, since most you're killfiled, plonk! posts I've seen would have been better not posted at all. (I seldom make such posts myself as if it really /has/ gotten to the point I'm plonking, I seldom see what further positive contribution that last post from my end could make. From their perspective I guess I just stop replying... letting them have the last word.) Can we agree that at least most do probably prefer straight to the point? No idea how many think your style is intolerable (apart from me) but as I guess... again... the needs of the many... I guess most people are somewhere in between, skimming/reading my epistles with varying degrees of impatience. I doubt that! :-) I guess most are at least annoyed to a certain degree, but most do not care enough to do anything about it either. Ignorance is a bliss, which I don't possess apparently. ;-) If you really feel the urge to go into such detail, do everyone on the list a favour and divide your mails in two parts. I am /trying/ to develop the habit of doing a TL;DR paragraph near the top when length justifies, but I'm afraid I've not made it a particularly regular habit just yet. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQ4yd2W50No - Do. Or do not. There is no try. as fancy-pants Yoda once said. ;-) But I don't see how a TL;DR-disclaimer *at the top* accomplishes anything. The idea was *not* to establish a Duncan babbler, don't read further-mark, but rather change the habit all-together. FWIW, thanks for the reminder that I need to keep working at it. As I said at the top, I /am/ aware of the situation... If I may offer some help there... after writing a paragraph, read again what you just wrote and search for repetitions. Apply some fuzzy logic there, as I saw you tend to say essentially the same with different words or with different arguments and explanations. Second, reread it again, see if you can shorten stuff to a degree that the essence of the message is still there. Remove everything that is more than 2 steps away from the question asked. Use details *sparely* and only when a true benefit is visible or a point you like to make does not work without the details. Then write the next paragarph, do the same there. When finished with the mail, right before you would send it, reread the whole mail again. If according to the rules above you don't see anything wrong, read it again, just to make sure. Btw., I tend to have a similar issue, but I'd say it is not nearly as bad! ;) But I follow the rules above nevertheless, courtesy demands it imho. 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.
