On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 12:45 AM, Ambrose Bonnaire-Sergeant <abonnaireserge...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Cedric Greevey <cgree...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Isn't this just another way of saying "humans will have to read to the >> end to see what the form is?" I provided a response to that objection >> already. > > Your response missed the point.
I don't agree, and furthermore I consider responding to someone's reasoned debate with an accusation that they in any way failed to comprehend something to be insulting and rude. The onus is on you to communicate clearly. If you say X when you really meant Y, and then someone provides a reasonable counterargument to X, in particular, "you missed the point" is not a nice way to respond. If your actual point was Y, you should have said so in the first place. Attempting to place the blame on the other party for your own confusion, misstatement, or what-have-you is simply not very sporting. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
