[arch-general] Err... Why is gvim now conflicting with vim?
omni.liye at gmail.com
Fri May 7 21:29:24 EDT 2010
I have to say althogh he may not act so "experienced" when facing problems,
I still like guys like David, about his passion in pursuing Linux
deployment in layer offices. I still remember somebody said when David came
to this ML the first time that "this guy makes this mailing list more active
rather than silent as it doesn't exist at all".
We need voices, if you don't like some just ignore them. Provided they are
not spam of course.
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 4:33 AM, Dave Morgan <davemorgan353 at btinternet.com>wrote:
> On 07/05/10 at 10:07pm, Philipp wrote:
> > Excerpts from Robert Howard's message of 2010-05-07 18:46:24 +0200:
> > > Geez. I guess it's just hard for people like David and myself, in my
> case a
> > > loyal Arch user for the better part of a decade, to understand the
> > > how-dare-you post a question asshole attitude that seems to have built
> up in
> > > the mailing lists over the past few years.
> > It's even worse on IRC. You don't want to go there, believe me.
> > If you have thick skin and a lot of time you might get a helpful answer
> > eventually but it's not for the faint hearted.
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Philipp
> If that is the case, the real question is why do questions not receive
> answers? If the reasonable answer is RTFM then fair enough, but if people
> simply receive aggressive replies then that's the problem.
More information about the arch-general