3 ms·

> I said that not everyone can or will read. This is the third time I repeat this, actually. You didn't read, neither the first nor second time, which demonstra

> I said that not everyone can or will read. This is the third time I repeat this, actually. You didn't read, neither the first nor second time, which demonstrated my point perfectly. Once again I did read your point, I simply disagree, and still do. Ironically it's only you who doesn't seem to be reading here. If you're going to continue to insist that isn't the case, then there really isn't any point in trying to have a discussion with you since you can't do the bare minimum and assume good faith.

Dalewyn 3y ago
Let me put it this way then: You are disagreeing to the notion most people ("computer users", as you put it) can't read. That's fine, and I even agree with you there; most people fortunately are literate today. The thing is I also never made such a notion nor was it the only notion I put forth. Again: "Not everyone can or will read." Emphasis mine. This is the fourth time I'm repeating myself, by the way. No, you still aren't reading. I do thank you once again for demonstrating my point, but this is getting a little ridiculous.
- PrimeMcFly 3y ago
  I'm not demonstrating your point for you, despite your continued insistence of that, and again, you really do seem to be refusing to read, not me. I agree it's getting ridiculous. Let me repeat something I said earlier since you apparently missed it: If they don't want to read, as opposed to being unable to read, they are irrelevant to the point being made. Now, do you actually have a useful point to make in response? Or just more nonsense about how I'm supposedly demonstrating your point despite that not being at all the case? If the latter, since you already have said it's ridiculous, and I agree, I'd ask you simply not respond to end this chain here.
  - Dalewyn 3y ago
    Users who will not read are nonetheless absolutely relevant because they are still users of your program. Development resources are finite, so it's natural and proper to excise the unnecessary and focus on what is truly worth developing. If maintaining text is expensive (translations/localizations) and at least some users will not appreciate them anyway, why keep the text if just using icons is cheaper and can suffice? I don't agree with this trend, but I do understand and respect where it is coming from.
    - PrimeMcFly 3y ago
      I agree with your last point. I disagree though that just icons can suffice, only in the sense that productivity is lost because without text, there is not a way to easily distinguish between multiple instances of a program. The thing is, the text has to be maintained anyway, it's still there, for example in tooltips, so not giving users an option to show it has no real defense that I can see.

Dalewyn 3y ago

Let me put it this way then: You are disagreeing to the notion most people ("computer users", as you put it) can't read. That's fine, and I even agree with you there; most people fortunately are literate today. The thing is I also never made such a notion nor was it the only notion I put forth. Again: "Not everyone can or will read." Emphasis mine. This is the fourth time I'm repeating myself, by the way. No, you still aren't reading. I do thank you once again for demonstrating my point, but this is getting a little ridiculous.

PrimeMcFly 3y ago
I'm not demonstrating your point for you, despite your continued insistence of that, and again, you really do seem to be refusing to read, not me. I agree it's getting ridiculous. Let me repeat something I said earlier since you apparently missed it: If they don't want to read, as opposed to being unable to read, they are irrelevant to the point being made. Now, do you actually have a useful point to make in response? Or just more nonsense about how I'm supposedly demonstrating your point despite that not being at all the case? If the latter, since you already have said it's ridiculous, and I agree, I'd ask you simply not respond to end this chain here.
- Dalewyn 3y ago
  Users who will not read are nonetheless absolutely relevant because they are still users of your program. Development resources are finite, so it's natural and proper to excise the unnecessary and focus on what is truly worth developing. If maintaining text is expensive (translations/localizations) and at least some users will not appreciate them anyway, why keep the text if just using icons is cheaper and can suffice? I don't agree with this trend, but I do understand and respect where it is coming from.
  - PrimeMcFly 3y ago
    I agree with your last point. I disagree though that just icons can suffice, only in the sense that productivity is lost because without text, there is not a way to easily distinguish between multiple instances of a program. The thing is, the text has to be maintained anyway, it's still there, for example in tooltips, so not giving users an option to show it has no real defense that I can see.