Re: Binding M-n and M-p to forward-paragraph and backward-paragraphrespectively

[chad]

On Apr 9, 2011, at 8:24 AM, Drew Adams wrote:

>> the idea that we shouldn't add new bindings because then
>> someone in the future might think that those bindings are
>> somehow `special' - and that we might want them to think 
>> otherwise - is a rather extreme combination of straw-man and 
>> absurdity.
> 
> It is neither straw man nor absurdity.  And it is not just an idea.  The last
> go-round about binding some (function) key by default clearly demonstrated 
> this:
> The discussion had not even finished, and no decision had yet been reached,
> before some were sending in posts that indicated that they understood that the
> key was _reserved_ and should not be changed by users or 3rd-party libraries.

Yes, where as this is a binding that is clearly intended to be changed by users 
and 3rd-party libraries.

I didn't say that your idea was *always* wrong; just in this case.

*Chad