Re: Java 7 features
- From: blmblm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <blmblm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 10 Sep 2007 09:56:51 GMT
In article <1188951770.079867.261560@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Twisted <twisted0n3@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sep 3, 2:10 pm, blm...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <blm...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
You said (or at least implied) that you found it in a Seinfeld
newsgroup. It's pretty much a given that such a newsgroup is one of
rec.fan, alt.fan, or foreign-language. :P
I don't understand how you get from that an implication that I
found this silly thing in a Seinfeld newsgroup. Why would I be
reading such a group, given that -- as I stated -- I'm not a fan?
I have no idea. But it's a usenet acronym, and you associated it with
Seinfeld; the intersection of the two yields "a Seinfeld newsgroup" as
the source.
Seems like a stretch to me, for the reason given below. But --
whatever.
Anyway, do you never come across references to pop culture
in newsgroups devoted to other topics?
[ snip ]
Not true, according to a quick search of Google's archives -- but
the previous mention was in a post by, um, me, in February 2006.
Hm.
In other words, yes true. It's obscure. It's used once a year or so
online and by just one person. It doesn't get much more obscure than
that. :)
The entry just above cjlp is alt.usage.english. Very likely
that's where I came across this silly thing -- it's a group I
follow, though not always closely. Digging a little deeper into
the archives, I notice that some people there also had to have
the thing explained. Hm.
Evidence that it might not be a good idea to assume everyone will
understand it at a glance. :)
That was kind of the point of my "Hm". (Maybe you got that.)
Odd that you'd find such appalling English (gratuitous use of
acronyms, no less!) in alt.usage.english -- maybe because the "alt"
dominates the other terms in the equation. :P
Not that it matters, or that you care, but -- not really, except
in the sense that thread drift is more common than it is in some
more technical groups. I searched again for my silly initialism in
Google's archives of aue, sorting by date rather than relevance,
and found that some of the most recent uses were by newsgroup
regulars whose language is generally very good, and the uses
went unremarked. Maybe that's what contributed to my impression
that this thing was in wide use. <shrug>
But much as it pains me to say so, especially after being called a
nitwit, I'll concede that two out of three isn't, in this context,
an overwhelming majority, and you probably have a point that this
silly initialism is not one I should be slinging around in cjlp.
Not if your intent is to communicate clearly and easily, without
overly burdening your readers with the need to ask clarifying
questions (whether of you or of Google).
As for the "two out of three", it's a rather small sample size.
Oh sure. When I said "in context" I had in mind exactly that.
I could have said that more clearly.
As for "nitwit" that was semi-humorous (there was a smiley in
proximity, too).
Despite the implied criticism, that either there was a flaw in your
logic (= you are stupid) or you should simply have already known the
answer (= you are an ignoramus)?
For me it might depend on how the error was pointed out. I don't
think I automatically take "you're wrong" as an insult.
Even when stated that tactlessly?
Hard to say without context, but I don't think so.
I don't take these as insults -- I'm mildly embarrassed about
being caught in a mistake, but glad it was spotted.
Mighty generous of you to let those slide but sooner or later it will
result in your having a reputation for being a stupid ignoramus if
such perceptions about you propagate uncorrected by you, won't it?
Well, my thinking is that admitting a mistake in public adds to
my credibility rather than reducing it (because it indicates that
I'm more interested in truth and facts than in being perceived
as always right).
That's very strange. It would seem to suggest to people that a) you're
more likely to be wrong in the first place, even if b) you're more
likely to fix it later.
Could be. I guess I could try harder to not make mistakes in
the first place, but once a mistake is made, it seems to me
that the sensible thing to do is to acknowledge it and move on.
Insisting that one is always right, or that any mistakes are
somehow someone else's fault -- I generally find this unattractive
behavior, and one of its more likely results is that others become
a little too eager to spot mistakes [*]. I guess that could
sometimes be useful, but it all sounds too confrontational for me.
[*] I think we're observing exactly that response here in this
newsgroup, to your posts.
--
B. L. Massingill
ObDisclaimer: I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Java 7 features
- From: nebulous99
- Re: Java 7 features
- References:
- Re: Java 7 features
- From: Twisted
- Re: Java 7 features
- From: blmblm
- Re: Java 7 features
- From: Twisted
- Re: Java 7 features
- Prev by Date: Re: OT: money
- Next by Date: Re: Great SWT Program
- Previous by thread: Re: Java 7 features
- Next by thread: Re: Java 7 features
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
