Re: A modern-mode?

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

   > Names mean things and in this discussion it was because Emacs was seen
   > as old (i.e., un-modern), a new user would be curious why modern-mode
   > isn't the default.  And as the discussion has showed, there is no
   > agreement what people think is modern.  So it would be simply better
   > to avoid the term "modern" completely.

   Yes, let's find a different name for this.  I'd object to calling it
   "modern", because I disagree that vanilla Emacs isn't.

A more specific name also means that not everything has to be added to
such a theme/mode -- as it has a specific goal to solve.  E.g., making
it easier for new users to use Emacs -- which is slightly different
from "modernizing" Emacs (similar sentiment to Eli there) which
Andrea(?) seemed want to address.

   newcomer-friendly-mode? new-to-emacs-mode? numacs-mode?

ersatz-mode?