From: Weiqi Gao <weiqigao AT a DOT crl DOT com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: EMACS is superb
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 14:30:22 +0000
Organization: CRL Network Services
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <36F7A57E.2B11DB02@a.crl.com>
References: <3 DOT 0 DOT 1 DOT 16 DOT 19990322085538 DOT 1c1fccd4 AT shadow DOT net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: a116015.stl1.as.crl.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.0.34 i586)
X-Accept-Language: en
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Ralph Proctor wrote:
>
> Do one job with EMACS then complain.

I'm an EMACS user, but I can't help but notice a logical flaw in your
argument.  What you are advocating is that only current or past EMACS
users are qualified to comment on EMACS regardless of the merits of
their argument.

My stand is, if someone has a gripe about EMACS, we need to analyse the
content of the gripe and not on whether the originator has used EMACS or
not.

I haven't used, for example, the PIE editor at all.  That doesn't
disqualify me from making comments about it, like "PIE is inferior to
EMACS", which experienced PIE users will dismiss as from someone with no
PIE experience, or like "PIE lacks the integration with a source control
system", which even the author of PIE cannot dismiss as incorrect,
because he knows that the comment is correct.

-- 
Weiqi Gao
weiqigao AT a DOT crl DOT com