On Wed, 7 Mar 2012, Donald Allen wrote:
"While the FAQ is indeed clear, the installer's simplicity appears
at that point a little deceptive, in that one (I know I was) is
tempted to think that such a user-friendly installer would not harm
one so easily..."
I disagree. I think the installer is fine the way it is and it was not
the problem here. The problem was the original poster's too-cavalier
approach to something that is well-known to be dangerous. What
happened here is somewhat analogous to texting while driving or flying
an airplane drunk and, when disaster occurs, being upset (assuming
survival) that the equipment didn't prevent it.
Except that the equipment shoudn't direct people to behave in such a
disasterous way. And this the case.
Regards,
David
