Re: [dwm] Being not so elitist

And now it's all devolving into name calling.

> I can't figure out why you typed this except as an attack vector.

Possibly. It could very easily be read that way. However,

> I see no reason to redact statements just because some whiners think
> everything on the internet should be a social-networking hugfest. If
> they want a community to cuddle them...

could be read as an attack vector as well.

Markus, you have a good point. DWM shouldn't discourage people from
using it outright - and I don't think anyone here would disagree with
that. But DWM should always remain targeted at a very niche market:
the hackers. If you (generic "you"... as in the masses) want to try
DWM, great. But if you think you can jump on to the email list
because you can't figure out how to run "make", you're seriously
mistaken. People here are focused elsewhere.

As to "in the beginning"... yes. There were some horrendous times -
and I know that I added several stupid remarks myself (back in the WMI
days... before WMII). That elitist remark has helped clear the
"unnecessary" chatter and keep scope minimized.

But how to address it? Elitist isn't so much a dirty word as I think
you believe it to be. What would be an alternative? "Welcome to DWM.
 Don't post questions about config schemes. Don't post questions
about makefiles. Don't ask why we don't use autoconf. Don't...
Don't... Don't..." To me, that's negative. Elitist sounds much more
positive.

Oh, and relax about the flamewar. Elitists love that sort of thing.
We get a flamewar going at least two or three times a year. :)

On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 09:53, Mate Nagy <mnagy_AT_port70.net> wrote:
>> I would like to propose adding xft support and gnome systray support to dwm.
>> And also sound effects.
> Neat idea. Also, someone could write a config editor that patched the
> binary (like what Dehacked did to the old DOS DOOM).
>
> M.
>
>

-- 
"You took the words right out of my mouth, Penfold"
"Sorry, sir, do you want them back?"