On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 05:21:24PM +0100, Christiaan Briggs wrote:
On 10 Aug 2006, at 5:02 PM, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
Then your users are perfectly welcome to use something that does what they need done, which is, to my understanding, the official position of the Mediawiki developers.
And, as I said in my initial email, they will. But that wasn't the point of my post. As I said: "The reason I'm posting this is simply to put forward the view that I hope WYSIWYG or some relevant variant will be developed for Wikimedia projects in the near future, because I think the hurdles that stop many people from participating on our office intranet apply equally to Wikimedia projects."
In your haste to prove your self-image as an opinionated bastard of extraordinary magnitude you completely missed my point.
Expand, then, on your point, based on Wikipedia's article count and sustained network transfer rates.
You don't know me from Adam; you're neither entitled, nor informed enough, to call me a prick.
Someone who says I and the people I work with are talking bullshit and should get screwed because they want computers to work for them instead of the other way around is entitled to the label of prick as far as I'm concerned. By all means, be opinionated but if you're going to use such language then get used to having it thrown back at you.
I said that an asserted argument was bullshit.
You *called me a prick*.
Different thing entire.
An opinionated bastard of extraodrinary magnitude? Yes. But it seems to me that "MediaWiki should gravitate in -- or be rewritten into -- something that happens to suit *my* user base's needs, whether that would be suitable to the WMF -- which is how your comments read, to me -- is *much* more presumptious than my comments.
Then you need to read a little more slowly.
Well, we'll see, won't we.
Cheers, -- jra