Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 01:06 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 09:53 AM, Duane wrote:I understand and support that guideline, and try to follow it. That being said, there is a fine line between "debating usefulness" and discussing just what features in a proposed feature suggestion might be problematic that the original suggester might not have considered.
I am sort of "the root cause" of this topic, and I thought I'd covered all bases in the first two messages, but I see the value in additions to and respectful objections to aspects of a proposal that are not "debating usefulness," per se, but what should and should not be included in a potential feature set. I am not all seeing, and so long as the objection is not of the, "Why in the *%*$& would you want that?!," nature and is respectful and considered, that should not be thought of as "debating usefulness."
P.S.: Watch this space. I'm about to launch another feature request, with explanation of reason for wanting, that I'm sure will raise some issues to consider that I may not have considered, as much as I tried to cover as many bases as possible.
Brian - Windows 10 Pro, 64-Bit, Version 1809, Build 17763
Presenting the willfully ignorant with facts is the very definition of casting pearls before swine.
~ Brian Vogel