-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 11:14:30AM +0000, Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Wednesday 14 December 2016 09:13:49 to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 08:54:07PM -0600, David Wright wrote: > > > > [...] > > > > > Eh? How does calling something by the string "wlx00c0ca364bd2" instead > > > of "wlan0" make it less accessible? > > > > Thank you! You just highlighted why I'm not staying for long in that > > discussion. I'm out. > > > This is a) incomprehensible and b) unnecessary. If you want out, just drop > out. There is no need to imply that you are in some way forced out by > someone else's reprehensible behaviour.
? I really can't fathom how it's possible for you to interpret my words as me "feeling forced to" whatever or as seeing any behaviour as "reprehensible". So if I made that impression to anyone else, here's my statement: no, I don't feel forced to anything (and leave this thread in free will), and no, I don't think it's reprehensible for anyone to have different tastes, opinions or whatever than I have. I just stated that I dindn't want to extend this discussion forever, because I consider it a matter of judgement/taste on which there are many possible positions, but feelings are typically strong. David's answer illustrated my point so beautifully that i had to say thanks. It's up there for reference :-) regards - -- t -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlhRLgEACgkQBcgs9XrR2kYREgCeNn2YFcVaod+XxgLHmkZr8uYO kg8An0coCKQEoHnWI9GVtoLNPHWZiXQ5 =U9Hk -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
