Eh? 1. The comments I'm remarking on are in Zed's article after his changes. 2. It's not "the comments he made towards VanL" that bother me, apart from his cl

Eh? 1. The comments I'm remarking on are in Zed's article after his changes. 2. It's not "the comments he made towards VanL" that bother me, apart from his claim (which is still there) that somehow VanL's lightning talk encouraged the idea that "Python delinks". What's lacking isn't an apology but an explanation. 3. I think what I said differs from other comments in the discussion here in both content and emphasis. Your mileage, of course, may vary. 4. I have no intention of fanning any flames. What I want is to understand what Zed is saying, which at the moment doesn't seem to make much sense.