home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Subject: Re: Shortcuts file
- Date: Wed, 27 Jul 94 14:40:00 BST
- From: C.J.Ridd@computer-science.birmingham.ac.uk
- Precedence: bulk
-
- Ofir wrote:
- [Evan Langlois wrote]
- >>As to where to put it, no one has even agreed to the above. They are
- >>still arguing about ^A and trying to vote on it. Damn stupid to vote
- >>on ^A when you can configure it instead.
- >
- >It's much more stupid to tell people you are trying to work with towards
- >agreement that they are stupid. The ^A vote IS needed, because there has
- >been no agreement about the app-defs file, it may not get the 65% approval
- >required. In which case we still need a standard. We (except for Tim
- >Miller) are not arguing about ^A and this has not been under discussion for
- >about a month.
-
- Actually, Evan has a point. I took the ^A vote to mean 'do you want
- select-all and unselect-all functions?', because of the potential vote
- on the shortcuts file completely overruling the ^A vote results.
-
- We ought to be very careful in the future about organising these
- votes, in order to avoid these problems. I have a feeling this vote
- was purely held to silence certain members of the list; I may be
- wrong.
-
- What we *should* be doing, IMHO, is proposing and voting for the
- existence of a shortcut file or files, and only then discussing the
- precise contents of it. The whole voting period should be much shorter
- too, as this list is very active :-) Say two weeks per vote.
-
- By the way, where does this 65% number come from?
-
- --Chris
-
- X.400: g=chris;s=ridd;o=nhs imc;ou1=cosit;a=attmail;p=nhs imc;c=gb
- Cix: chrisridd@cix
-
-