On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 6:12 PM, Antoon Pardon <antoon.par...@rece.vub.ac.be> wrote: > Op 16-09-13 09:46, Chris Angelico schreef: >> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 5:29 PM, Antoon Pardon >> <antoon.par...@rece.vub.ac.be> wrote: >>> instead of showing us all that you >>> too can contribute in a careless manner? >> >> Also: It takes effort to contribute usefully in a way that looks >> careless :) It's not saving effort, it's making a point. > > So what? The end result is still a contribution that looks like > it was carelessly written.
It's a contribution that SAYS that it looks carelessly written. I think most people here are intelligent enough to know that that's different from actual carelessness. > Do you think making a point is an end that justifies any kind of > means? If not why do you argue in a way that suggest just that. > If yes, does that mean baiting Nikos is all right if it makes > a point, or responding somewhat obnoxious to him? In a debate, you make points and counterpoints. In most debates, you also gain (or lose) "points for style". Steven scored plenty of the latter IMO. You're here making a straw-man and a false dichotomy; I believe that "making a point" is sufficient justification for what Steven and I did, but I don't think it justifies "any kind of means". I would not, for instance, destroy Nikos's server, data, or access to either, to make a point; and history will confirm this. ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list