My message in this particular instance is not aligned with either of these, and you seem to be misreading me. I have no issue with people choosing different tools, switching techniques, finding different ways of thinking about problem solving, text-editing, etc. It's not even about "punishing" those who choose to leave my beautiful world or trying to get them back, it's about setting expectations for those who have never seen it.
What I see quite often is when people profess years of using the tool and finding it unsatisfactory, only to reveal (if ever) that they've engaged with just its surface layer. It's like someone saying they found a piano limiting after years of only using it as a percussion instrument. My point is about embracing Emacs as a Lisp environment from day one - not because everyone must use it this way, but because that's what it actually is. When you treat it as 'just an editor' you're working against its design rather than with it. Those who embrace its programmable nature early often discover possibilities they didn't know they were looking for. Yes, this may mean a slightly steeper upfront commitment, but it also means actually using the tool rather than having square-peg-round-hole mismatched expectations.
It's not about choosing nicer or harsher messaging, it's about the truth, and it comes from the heart - I personally, of course, regret years wasted in vain instead of finding Emacs sooner; it works great for me. I understand it may not work that well for everybody, and I'd rather they realize that sooner, instead of wasting years of their lives. I also spent a long time trying to rationalize Emacs in my own head, because I kept approaching it from the wrong angle, but I am happy I didn't quit. Some people may not have that kind of patience.
> When you treat it as 'just an editor' you're working against its design rather than with it.
No. This is exactly the sort of talk that turns people off from Emacs. You can use it as "just an editor." Indeed, read the GNU Emacs Manual. It almost entirely describes "just an editor." An excellent editor. The user needs to consult the Emacs Lisp Reference Manual only if extending Emacs is desirable.
Comments like this one suggest that Emacs is designed only to be programmed and that if the user does not program it, the user is "working against its design." This is just as false as saying that a Vim user who writes no VimScript is working against Vim's design. No, the user who doesn't program the editor is...using the editor. As designed.
> You can use it as "just an editor."
You can, sure - sometimes we all do, when we need to debug a faulty package, we run it with the -Q option. I've been working for many years with people who use Emacs, have many friends who use Emacs, have mentored complete newbies and regularly discuss advanced topics - I have yet to meet someone who uses Emacs as is - with no customizations whatsoever. In fact, if I meet anyone who does that, I would very much be interested in learning their rationale, and perhaps even try to question their mental or emotional state.
Vim on the other hand, is very different in this, there are in fact plenty of users who do use it with zero customizations, daily.
> read the GNU Emacs Manual.
Okay. Let's do it... M-x info-emacs-manual - the very first two sentences - "Emacs is an advanced, extensible, customizable, self-documenting editor. This manual describes how to edit with Emacs and some of the ways to customize it." The third paragraph right there, at the very top, already explicitly says: "For information on extending Emacs, see Emacs Lisp". Five words pertaining extensibility in just three opening paragraphs, against only a couple of cognates of "editor".
What the heck are you even trying to argue here? Rephrasing your point doesn't change the underlying fact - Emacs is first and foremost an "extensible editor", not "an editor that can be extended (if desired)" - the emphasis is on "extensible", not on the "editor". That's what sets it apart from literally any other tool that gets used as "just an editor".
If regurgitating the factuality engrossed in the manual, ardently or otherwise, turns some people off from Emacs - so be it, like I already said before - it's probably for the best. Better for them, better for the Emacs community.