sentient trees yes, usage no

Ranjit Bhatnagar · 02 Sep 2006, 20:48 · from 2006-September.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: ranjit at moonmilk.com (Ranjit Bhatnagar)
Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2006 16:48:50 -0400
Subject: (urth) sentient trees yes, usage no
In-Reply-To: <BAY103-F6A2596580B8862E8DC49C883D0 at phx.gbl>
References: <44F91AC8.4090101 at io.com>
	<BAY103-F6A2596580B8862E8DC49C883D0 at phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <9c6b022b0609021348l56032252xb3d21de80270fd2a at mail.gmail.com>

Bom Miller wrote:
> Speaking of literature and speaking of language usage are topics that can
> not be separated.  Communication requires reasonable language use.

Look, just think of these as like Asimov's three laws of robotics.
Only there's just two of them that I'm concerned with here, but bear
with me:

> I wrote:
>
>  > Talking about the works of Gene Wolfe: GOOD
>  > Talking about matters of English usage: DISCOURAGED...
....except where such discouragement would conflict with the First Law.

And now for a new rule:
Nitpicking the rules - AW, WHAT THE HECK. GO FOR IT.

- ranjit

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net