From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?utf-8?B?SsO2cm4=?= Engel Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 13:21:02 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2/3 mtd: add support for flash on the SEGA Dreamcast Visual Memory Unit Message-Id: <20080324132101.GA2899@logfs.org> List-Id: References: <1206209035.6324.29.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080322183200.GD19347@logfs.org> <1206211147.6324.48.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080322185600.GE19347@logfs.org> <1206207805.6324.13.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1206209035.6324.29.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080322183200.GD19347@logfs.org> <1206211147.6324.48.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080324020832.GA13935@linux-sh.org> <1206360384.6283.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <1206360384.6283.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: Adrian McMenamin Cc: Paul Mundt , MTD , LKML , linux-sh On Mon, 24 March 2008 12:06:24 +0000, Adrian McMenamin wrote: >=20 > I have no desire to have a flame war over this. But I didn't understand > the sentence, was told twice that I should act on it and asked twice > simply what it meant. Eg the second time... >=20 > "I'm sorry, but the comment above isn't good english. What do you > mean?" Just for reference, I had no bloody idea what the "" in your sentence meant. Or what the comment as a whole was referring to. In other words, we could't communicate. Probably more important is the thing you didn't ask about. The cast is - to use a techinical term - crap. And when someone ignores such things, but instead makes a comment about my English language skills, my natural response is to suspect a troll. Trolls tend to replace "I don't understand " with "you are an idiot" in some disguise like a comment about hairstyle or language skills. You ignored other things as well. In general, the things you ignored are a lot more important than the things you didn't ignore. Which again is a good recipe for fruitless discussions, if not flamewars. As is a metadiscussion about previous discussions - like this one. > Not unreasonable I think. After the second time I was told all > communication would cease. And, yes, that did annoy me, especially when > the next thing I get is someone telling me I didn't listen to them. Then maybe we can end the digressions and get back to the code and improving it? I would welcome that. Would you mind if I sent you patches against your code? Might be a way to avoid metadiscussions as much as possible. J=C3=B6rn --=20 Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is an absurd one. -- Voltaire