Current Desktop capabilities - take 3.

[Michael Meeks]

On Sat, 2004-06-05 at 02:30 +1000, Jeff Waugh wrote:
> > However - before complicating it beyond belief - it'd be nice to get more
> > input from the ravingly-anti brigade to see if they're still so, or if
> > this is more acceptable.
> 
> Please play fair and nice. This kind of stuff is *totally* unnecessary. It
> sets a bad example *and* bad precedent.

	A nice land-grab of the moral high-ground :-) Of course I don't even
want to play fair and nice - perhaps you forget: I am evil
incarnate ! :-)

	Ultimately, AFAICS this is not a particularly acrimonious debate; what
are you taking offense at ? 'ravingly-anti' ? that is rather tounge-in-
cheek; to-rave[1] is transparently amusingly extreme and almost totally
inapplicable to what we've been seeing :-) Either way: what it means is:

	"I'd love to get some feedback from the people most vehemently opposed
to the initial idea"

	which is (presumably) hard to fault ? and I had imagined somewhat
transparently obvious.

	But, perhaps it was just my spelling that offended; then again if I've
offended someone I was referring to in this way - potentially they can
stick up for themselves :-)

	Foo,

		Michael.

[1] - cf. 'rabid enthusiasm' etc. etc. substitute 'extremely' for
'ravingly' and you get a more uninteresting screed.
-- 
 michael at ximian.com  <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot