On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 1:06 PM, James <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 15/09/2010 12:40, Graham Percival wrote:
>>
>> Good point. Next time I'll do a grumpy&fluffy reply -- first I'll
>> give a Graham-style response to shock&awe, then (in the same
>> email) I'll give a kind and generous response.
>
> and that would be a shame.
...
> I guess we all donate our time for different reasons, but praise and polite
> conversation is not one I do it for.
Hey, moron! All you have to do is stop reading when I tell you to.
There's a reason that the "grumpy" part comes first. Mao, do you
think I'm new to this kind of stuff?
James, Valentin: stop reading. Fluffy bunnies ahead.
I agree that it would be a shame for the community to lose my distinct
style -- I do it deliberately, after all! When properly understood,
they add humour and a "personal touch" to what could otherwise be a
rather boring job (or volunteer effort). The French contributors who
met my stuttering self in Bordeaux can attest that I'm not *at all*
scary in person. :)
OTOH, when read out of context ("context" here meaning the full
multi-year history between me and the people I'm aiming that email
at), some of my emails really do paint a bad picture of our
development community in general, and me in particular.
I think that the "two-pronged" (or "Jekyll and Hyde") approach is the
best way to meet both goals. People who appreciate the nasty can get
their jollies that way, but the very same email will present a fair
and balanced view of the situation.
Wishing you kittens and love,
- Graham
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
