I'm sorry, but this thread seems to have taken a detour. Being a Dane, I run into these kinds of responses all the time, simply because I find it counter-productive to sugarcoat things when writing English.
On Sat, 12 Jul 2014 14:41:51 +0200 "li...@rhsoft.net" <li...@rhsoft.net> wrote: > Am 12.07.2014 14:35, schrieb Wietse Venema: > > li...@rhsoft.net: > >> Am 12.07.2014 14:13, schrieb Wietse Venema: > >>> Arun: > >>>> Is it wrong to ask questions? Is 'why' not allowable ? I guess it > >>>> is because you say so! No, because it's already said in the docs, at Wikipedia, Google, ... Why should all this be explained again, when lots and lots of pages already covers it? And why is that not OK? > >>> If you don't know what to use, use the documentation examples. > >>> The examples will do a reasonable job. > >>> > >>> If you were expecting a free lecture about the pros and cons of > >>> hash versus btree versus lmdb and so on, then sorry, I consider > >>> that an unreasonable expectation > >> > >> maybe somebody else would have answered something different > >> than "use the Postfix documentation" - demand from others > >> always be nice and friendly should lead in practice what > >> you preach > > > > It's time for me to stop trying to help people, because > > there are too many who read hostile intent in my replies > > no - i only tried to point out that responses sometimes > appear to have unfriendly or bad intention even if they > are not meant that way > > it's the same as you and Victor yesterday assumed bad > intention in two posts of me finally with "Stupid > knee-jerk reactions" > > in doubt assume good intentions even in case of bad > chosen wording could prevent a lot of heat Yeah well, this should go both ways, but clearly does not. I would always prefer a short, no bullshit / sugarcoated answer, but apparently someone has concluded we can't use those, because someone gets upset. How can this even be an issue here, on a technical mailing list?
