From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7744 invoked by alias); 9 May 2018 03:04:34 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 7728 invoked by uid 89); 9 May 2018 03:04:34 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=interaction, distractions X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com From: Alexandre Oliva To: Torvald Riegel Cc: Siddhesh Poyarekar , Jonathan Nieder , DJ Delorie , libc-alpha@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert Abortion joke removal. References: <20180507235151.GC10348@aiede.svl.corp.google.com> <26d9590f-6e2f-8039-005f-a433b0ac8bfd@gotplt.org> <1525810157.7567.814.camel@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 09 May 2018 03:04:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <1525810157.7567.814.camel@redhat.com> (Torvald Riegel's message of "Tue, 08 May 2018 22:09:17 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.0.91 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-SW-Source: 2018-05/txt/msg00374.txt.bz2 I'm sorry, Torvald, but there's nothing of substance in this message of yours that I haven't already just responded in other messages, so I'll just refer you to the other responses. If there's any answer you're still missing after reading my other replies, please bring it back in a smaller message and let's go from there, shall we? The reason for me to suggest this is that, as much as I remember, you and I have never been able to convince each other of anything, really, and our debates have tended to degenerate into nit-picking and distractions as each party saught a "win" over the other in some irrelevant point, while relegating the relevant matter to the side. I don't want to subject others to such drivel from both of us, and I don't want to subject myself to it either. I've long concluded it's waste of time for both of us, and I have no reason to expect this to be different. We just have explosive chemistry when at opposite sides of an argument, so I'll cut our direct interaction down to a minimum. >> I didn't mean that, so your uncertain gratitute is indeed misplaced. > See, you don't like slightly snarky comments either. I think we've miscommunicated. I didn't have any issue whatsoever about the comment, it just carried an incorrect assumption. I corrected that incorrect assumption, for the record (as we often do to each other), and then proceeded to agree that the raised issue was quite relevant indeed. I can't imagine how you concluded from this that I didn't like it, specifically, or in general. -- Alexandre Oliva, freedom fighter http://FSFLA.org/~lxoliva/ You must be the change you wish to see in the world. -- Gandhi Be Free! -- http://FSFLA.org/ FSF Latin America board member Free Software Evangelist|Red Hat Brasil GNU Toolchain Engineer