> Did I missed something?! > > 'dwm only?' subject is about splitting lists or getting things > reverted or whatever you call it, I am not that informed about mailing > list options and that's best I could do to define what I would like to > see. If there is better way to phrase what I already stated and better > address than creating new subject on mailing list please be my guest to > do that -- English is not my primary language.
You original question was just about not receiving wmii related e-mails. I was suggesting creating a topic as an actual complaint against the merger of the two mailing lists. > My view on wmii is exactly the same as wmii user can see dwm, as > something too strange and out of interest. I do respect wmii but don't > care about it and you also agreed that 'wmii and dwm very obviously > cater to different people'. My line was just illustration how different > (unmixable?) they are. Ah, I see. However, the placement, harshness and wording of the line did not seem to communicate that you were just giving an example. It seemed more like a spiteful insult to the opposite party since they dared to get their posts on your mailing list. It's a crude way of communicating your point but I see what you were trying to do. > So everybody sorry if I was rude but I still can't understand what I > did wrong? 'Stop whining' is rude on any language. It was rude which is why I said I didn't necessarily agree with him. However, your post also appeared rude because of your wmii/dwm comment and after all of the arguing on the board during the past few days I was getting tired of people trying to start arguments as your post appeared to be trying to do. > Dusan Thanks for the reply, Thomas > On Sun, 24 May 2009 12:29:12 -0400 > Thomas Gallen <kaori.hin...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I don't necessarily agree with Uriel's solution but your tone is no > > less rude and point no more correct. The wmii mailing list was a > > mailing list for wmii, the dwm mailing list was a mailing list for > > dwm, NEITHER of them were the Slashdot RSS feed. Regardless of how > > "interesting" you thought the topics were (and I admit I liked a few > > of them). Placing them on either of those lists is unnecessary and > > disruptiive and I think we need a separate mailing list for topics > > like those. > > > > Ever since the list merger the sheer amount of flaming, elitism and > > arguments has increased exponentially and it's disgusting to have to > > watch. Your line on wmii and dwm being the latest example. wmii and > > dwm very obviously cater to different people so arguing about it is a > > stupid thing to do and yet you voluntarily did just that. You make > > your views abundantly clear so why don't you voice your concerns to > > the people in charge instead of taking it out on other people? > > > > If you want to start a topic regarding splitting the lists again (or > > labelling them differently) I would gladly participate as that seems > > to be a topic on which we both agree. > > > > Thomas > > > > On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 05:44:54PM +0200, Dusan wrote: > > > Sorry but you are not right, not to mention rude response. Dwm list > > > has plenty of _interesting_ topics related to dwm or any other > > > minimal suckless project. It is fantastic way to get informed about > > > other minimal projects and better ways to do something. Wmii is > > > bloatware for me or at least topic that has nothing common with > > > dwm. Correct me if I am wrong. As much as I am thrilled to read > > > about what is the best way to describe shortcut in wmii manual, I > > > should not be forced to read that except if I choose to do so. Same > > > as would make no sense to mix dwm and gnome mailing lists make no > > > sense to mix dwm and wmii mailing lists. > > > > > > Dusan > > > > > > > > > On Sun, 24 May 2009 16:15:17 +0200 > > > Uriel <lost.gob...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Stop whining, the dwm list had tons of non-dwm chatter, if you > > > > are not interested in one thread, press the delete button. > > > > > > > > uriel > > > > > > > > On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Benjamin Conner > > > > <tommydabo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >> Why not to maintain dwm list and redirect its content to dev > > > > >> list? > > > > > > > > > > That's a great idea! > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 8:19 AM, pmarin <pacog...@gmail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> Why not to maintain dwm list and redirect its content to dev > > > > >> list? > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 2:07 PM, Benjamin Conner > > > > >> <tommydabo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >> > I'd like to know this too. I would only like dwm ones like > > > > >> > the lists used > > > > >> > to be. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 4:44 AM, Dusan <ef_...@yahoo.com> > > > > >> > wrote: > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> Is there a way to get only dwm related emails? Since lists > > > > >> >> are merged I get bunch of wmii related ones and frankly I > > > > >> >> don't need them at all. > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> Thanks. > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
