The generics of translation

[Adrian Buehlmann]

On 2012-07-02 23:23, Matt Mackall wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-07-02 at 22:59 +0200, Adrian Buehlmann wrote:
>> On 2012-07-02 22:46, Matt Mackall wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2012-07-02 at 21:20 +0200, Adrian Buehlmann wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Instead, you're practically painting me as someone who insists on
>>>>> English just because he arbitrarily hates foreigners or something.
>>>>> Thanks!
>>
>>> .. I'm just noting that what you wrote can easily be read in a very
>>> unflattering way.
>>
>> >From my point of view, that's a pretty stupid way of interpreting what I
>> wrote, which only someone would do who would like to make the impression
>> that I was actually trying to do that.
> 
> If you get an email the length of the last from me, it's safe to presume
> I've spent at least an hour writing it. If you spend less than a minute
> understanding it, you've probably missed the nuance and wasted my
> effort. Expect one-sentence messages in the future.
> 

Well. That's of course up to you how much you want to write in response
to what I write. But why you are getting on such a personal level once
again is beyond my understanding.

As for this part of the thread, I agree that it was a total waste of
time, both on your and my side. I did read your email three or four
times during the 15 or so minutes I wrote my response.

The waste started when you resorted (erroneously!) to claiming that I
painted you as someone who hates foreigners. Which did upset me. As for
the future, I'm just going to ignore the fact that you did that.

As for the communication style, I think resorting to sarcasm when trying
to make a point isn't helpful.

As per your other observation that I do make errors in understanding
you: That's true. But I think it turned out in quite a couple of cases
already that at times I'm not the only one who doesn't understand what
you are meaning. And in the past, I think what you wrote in response to
my misunderstandings often helped to make significant progress. I think
not just on my personal side alone.

I consider eliminating errors in understanding a fundamental part of
making progress. But I also consider making errors a fundamental part of
making progress too. Surely not in the form of incorporating design
errors in releases of Mercurial. These should be avoided at almost all cost.