> 1. I think the pencil tool should be renamed "Pixel Tool" if it's to stay
> > in the Tool box.
> > Reasons:
> > A. Jaggies don't make for realistic simulated pencil marks
> > B. There are better pencil-simulation tools in the Brush palate
>
> I am not sure that renaming a tool that old would
>
> Maybe you should write "I wish that someone else does".
>
When discussing possibilities, it is less important what I wish. My aim is
to provide good useful input, towards a consensus.
-C
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 10:03 AM, Tobias Ellinghaus wrote:
> On Thursday 23 June 2016
On Thursday 23 June 2016 08:43:55 C R wrote:
> To recap:
>
> 1. I think the pencil tool should be renamed "Pixel Tool" if it's to stay
> in the Tool box.
> Reasons:
> A. Jaggies don't make for realistic simulated pencil marks
> B. There are better pencil-simulation tools in the Brush palate
On Thursday 23 June 2016 07:06:04 C R wrote:
> So when I say "we can do this", I should say "I can do this"?
> I do wonder if people actually read what I post. :)
Maybe you should write "I wish that someone else does".
> -C
Tobias
[...]
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed
To recap:
1. I think the pencil tool should be renamed "Pixel Tool" if it's to stay
in the Tool box.
Reasons:
A. Jaggies don't make for realistic simulated pencil marks
B. There are better pencil-simulation tools in the Brush palate
2. I think Brush settings should be brush specific instead
In the interests of moving on with more important things than the symantics
of "we", I can attempt to extract the team aspect from my verbiage.
I can say for example: "It can be done this way." or "It might be decided
that."
It sounds cold, and impersonal to me, but if it allows us to move
So when I say "we can do this", I should say "I can do this"?
I do wonder if people actually read what I post. :)
-C
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 6:34 AM, JLuc wrote:
> As for the "we"
> Le 22/06/2016 22:48, C R a écrit :
>
>> I admit that I don't care at all who "we" includes.
As for the "we"
Le 22/06/2016 22:48, C R a écrit :
I admit that I don't care at all who "we" includes. Substitute with
"interested parties". I'm well aware that even great ideas might never get
priority. There are no promises, no guarantees. Right now "we" includes
just who is here. If we are