Ideas about how software should behave

[bartc]

On 09/11/2017 17:04, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 4:00 AM, bartc <bc at freeuk.com> wrote:
>> On 09/11/2017 16:33, Chris Angelico wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 2:14 AM, Rurpy via Python-list
>>> <python-list at python.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 11/08/2017 11:29 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> [...]
>>>>> Please, Jon, accept that we were not deliberately trying
>>>>> to put you down. Steve, if you can clearly state your position on this
>>>>> (possibly worded in the form of an apology?), it would go a long way
>>>>> to clearing this up.
>>>>> ChrisA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Are you the same ChrisA who wrote in this very list just a month ago
>>>> towards a poster you disagreed with:
>>>>
>>>>    "Yep. Good reasons like that you're a moron." [*]
>>>
>>>
>>> If I said that, there's more to it than just that I disagreed with the
>>> person.
>>
>>
>> Such as?
>>
> 
> I don't know. Why don't you go read the thread?

I did. You seemed to have disagreed very strongly with someone else's 
opinions. The context was a set of UI annoyances of BC:

BC:
 >> There are dozens more, yet you are surprised why sometimes I prefer 
doing
 >> things my own way? There are good reasons!

CA:
 > Yep. Good reasons like that you're a moron. You assume that since
 > *you* have never needed to produce one lower-case letter in a block of
 > upper-case, that "probably no one else has", and then you make it
 > impossible to do that in your editor. I have wanted to produce a
 > lower-case letter by holding Shift. I have also used this behaviour to
 > detect and recognize faults of various sorts. Do you understand the
 > concept of debugging a system by getting more information, not less?

(Thread "The loop and a half", around 19:10 UK time 8/10/17.)

-- 
bartc