How is calling you young, saying you have your entire life in front of you, an ad hominem? Except possibly to suggest that you have a quota of mistakes you need to go through before you become more efficient at avoiding them?
That's not what you said... you said he was too young to know vi/vim better than you. If you haven't used it in 30 years how would you know vim any better than a younger person? Why would age have anything to do with recognizing the benefits and drawbacks of various text editors? My grandparents barely knew how to turn on a computer... they wouldn't try to teach me that notepad is a better text editor than vim. I'm not discounting your experience (you definitely have more than most people here) but your arguments here could be better.
> ... you said he was too young to know vi/vim better than you.
At this point you have two choices. You can locate where I said that and quote my words directly, or you cam post your apology for making a false claim in this public forum.
To cut to the chase, I never said what you claim, your claim is false.
Ah -- I just figured out why you can't quote my words directly, to discover that I never said what you claim. You're using vim to compose your reply, and vim is so damned inefficient that the task of accurate reporting is consequently entirely beyond your energy or patience.
> If you haven't used it in 30 years how would you know vim any better than a younger person?
False premise, false conclusion. Locate where I said I had never used vi/vim for 30 years.
> Why would age have anything to do with recognizing the benefits and drawbacks of various text editors?
I never made that claim, so I don't have to defend it. Since you have obviously lost track of the thread, the OP used words to the effect that I might be suffering from a neophyte syndrome (not his words). I replied by pointing out that I am hardly a beginner, that in fact I was probably using these editors before he was born. Perfectly apt reply, one having only to do with experience, not age.
> ... your arguments here could be better.
A non sequitur. Ellen Page could also be better looking, even though that's a bit hard to imagine:
Summary. You need to post real quotes of real words, things people really said. Obviously if you're handicapped by using vi/vim to compose your replies, such trivial actions as copy and paste are -- well, by no means trivial -- so the content of your posts becomes more understandable.
> At this point you have two choices. You can locate where I said that and quote my words directly, or you cam post your apology for making a false claim in this public forum.
You first. You said:
> How is calling you young, saying you have your entire life in front of you, an ad hominem
Your exact words:
> Based on simple probability, the chance is better than 50% that I was using vi before you were born.
Based on simple probability, the chance is better than 50% that I was using vi before you were born.