On Wednesday 10 June 2009 1:17 pm, Raúl Núñez de Arenas Coronado wrote: > > Saluton Teemu :) > > On Wed 10 Jun 2009 19:59 +0200, Teemu Likonen <[email protected]> dixit: > > On 2009-06-10 12:58 (-0400), Charles Campbell wrote: > > > >> So, an unrelated topic, no semantics in transition, no acknowledgement > >> of the original thread's subject == hijacked thread. > > > > Or perhaps more accurately, a hijacked _subthread_.
in addition to a milder name for it, i think we need to include a brief description of how [whatever they are] are created the people who hijack threads are [mostly] new to both vim and the internet, or they wouldn't be doing it -- further, they are [mostly] nervous about getting the 'to' address correct, or they wouldn't be doing it the most important tone to take, imho, is kindness, because, having been in that situation myself, i remember all too well how traumatic it is to get scolded harshly for something i really didn't understand -- thrilled at finding a group of intelligent helpful generous people solving problems, suddenly to have them turn on you snarling is something we should bend over backwards to avoid sc --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
