View this page "FAQ English"
Edward Lipsett
been added. While this certainly won't resolve all our problems,
hopefully it will help.
Click on http://groups.google.com/group/honyaku/web/faq-english - or
copy & paste it into your browser's address bar if that doesn't work.
Wataru Tenga
that it still contains links to something I wrote a few years ago,
about avoiding mojibake when posting to the list. It occurred to me
that this may now be a non-issue, for the most part. In the past,
mojibake was a frequent issue on this list; but it almost never
happens these days (except occasionally in message titles, a problem
already covered by the recommendation not to use Japanese in titles).
I assume this is because Google Groups has improved its interface, and
email programs have also become smarter.
In the interests of keeping the FAQ short and simple, I propose
removing the mojibake plank. (The link at the end of the FAQ can be
retained.)
On another point, Ed wrote:
> While this certainly won't resolve all our problems,
hopefully it will help.
respectable in the 21st century? I remember it being discouraged by
older style guides, which only allowed it in expressions such as, "She
looked up at the doctor hopefully."
wataru
Malcolm James
new No.10.
----------------------
.... When someone posts a message to this list, that person retains
copyright to that message. That means, in theory, you should get the
permission of the original poster before copying it anywhere.
We all know that messages get cross-posted without such authorization, but
that doesn't mean we can condone it. At the very least, always delete the
mail address of the original poster, and probably his or her name, as well,
to preserve that person's privacy.
----------------------
Ed:
Surely there are cases where quoting a small portion of a message counts as
"fair use". Wouldn't deleting the author's name count as not giving proper
attribution to the author?
Malcolm
________________________________________________
Malcolm James
Japanese to English translation by native speakers
web: http://www.translation.co.jp
Edward Lipsett /t
> Surely there are cases where quoting a small portion of a message counts as
> "fair use". Wouldn't deleting the author's name count as not giving proper
> attribution to the author?
Surely there are such cases.
However, it is impossible to write a FAQ that will address each and every
situaation, and this is not unreasonable as it is written.
If you feel you have a better way to phrase it, why not suggest it?
----------
Edward Lipsett, Intercom, Ltd.
translation @intercomltd.com
Publishing: http://www.kurodahan.com
Translation & layout: http://www.intercomltd.com
sls
> Additions have been made to the preamble, and a new item No. 10 has
> hopefully it will help.
Hi Ed, both additions are useful, methinks, but i have serious doubts
about the issue of "copyright" (to say that copyright questions are a
disputed territory would be the understatement of the day): which
country's copyright rules apply? Although the word "copy" is at the root
of "copyright", actual copying" of a given text is in many cases the
least thing to worry about - instead there are concerns about other
issues (to the extent they are covered by copyright law), such as an
author's wish not to be misquoted (apparently quoted but with
alterations made to the text), not to see their text attributed to
somebody else, and not to see parts of their text (accurately) quoted
but, since taken out of context (which may include being inserted into a
different context), to imply something quite different from the author's
intentions or views and thus potentially harming their reputation.
In short, i think "we" should not go any further than to state that "the
author may have (retain) copyright" (i.e., "may have" or "may retain"
instead of "retains"). The uncertainty surrounding this issue comes out
in the next sentence you wrote: "That means, in theory, you should get
the permission of the original poster before copying it anywhere." I
would suggest to amend this sentence to read, "That means, you are best
advised to get the permission of the original poster before copying it
and posting it anywhere else." (To explain why this change: "should" may
not apply in many cases, and the mere act of copying a given post from a
public list - say for my private archive - does not compel me to ask for
permission, and i doubt many courts in the world would grant a given
author the right to limit said copying, since posting a message to a
list certainly - even if only implicitly - gives other list members
_some_ rights in regards to that message, such as the right to _copy_
it. BIANAL...)
FWIW...
Thanks & regards: Hendrik
--
Edward Lipsett /t
> In the interests of keeping the FAQ short and simple, I propose
> removing the mojibake plank. (The link at the end of the FAQ can be
> retained.)
Sorry, I'm afraid I have no idea what you are talking about.
Perhaps you could be a bit more explicit?
sls
> Surely there are cases where quoting a small portion of a message counts as
> "fair use". Wouldn't deleting the author's name count as not giving proper
> attribution to the author?
Indeed. But the issue of "fair use" reaches further: we all _love_
(don't we all?) search engines - and some of them show us ALL the posts
of this list in FULL length. Why? Because this list is not a closed list
- anybody, that means even non-subscribers, can see everything that has
been posted here. Copyright? Hm... (What i meant to say is, "rights" are
one thing on paper and another one in reality...)
So, what if someone, instead of quoting a given message (or parts
thereof) posts a link to where it can be found? Thus my comment about "a
policy against re-posting cannot be enforced" in a different thread.
(Steve, this is not a rebuttal, just an observation.)
Regards: Hendrik
--
Tom Donahue
> Has this use of "hopefully" (meaning "it is to be hoped that") become
> respectable in the 21st century? I remember it being discouraged by
> older style guides, which only allowed it in expressions such as, "She
> looked up at the doctor hopefully."
More than you ever wanted to know about the campaign against
this use of "hopefully" here:
http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=211
In a word, there's not much to it. Except in fiction, this
use is overwhelmingly prevalent and perfectly OK.
--
Tom Donahue
Wataru Tenga
I propose removing Clause 5, but keeping the link to Nora Heath's site
in Clause 11. The reason for removing 5. is that both email programs
and the Google Groups Web interface (as well as newer browsers?) have
made posting in Japanese much less of a problem than when the clause
was originally written. Why bother people with such technical issues
when they barely register anymore on the annoyance scale?
wataru
Steve Venti
> Surely there are cases where quoting a small portion of a message
> counts as "fair use". Wouldn't deleting the author's name count as
> not giving proper attribution to the author?
Of course it would. That is why it is important to keep in mind that
the issue we are addressing here is protecting not the OP's
intellectual property rights but his or her privacy.
The point is that when discussing Honyaku content in other forums, it
is OK to identify someone by name and make reference to something that
they said here, but care should be taken to protect their privacy. One
major point is to prevent the unintentional dissemination of email
addresses, which sometimes happens when people quote injudiciously.
--
Steve Venti
How can it be that twenty years ago I used to dream of being fluent
enough in Japanese to translate but nowadays meeting yet another
deadline does not make me feel as if I am living a dream come true?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Malcolm James
> However, it is impossible to write a FAQ that will address each and every
> situation, and this is not unreasonable as it is written.
In its current form, it seems to be giving permission to quote parts of
posts without attribution. That's inappropriate for an official FAQ. If
someone's going to quote me, I'd rather have the attribution, too.
> If you feel you have a better way to phrase it, why not suggest it?
Change
"always delete the mail address of the original poster, and probably his or
her name, as well, to preserve that person's privacy."
to
"delete the mail address of the original poster to preserve that person's
privacy."
HTH
Edward Lipsett /t
> Change
> "always delete the mail address of the original poster, and probably his or
> her name, as well, to preserve that person's privacy."
> to
> "delete the mail address of the original poster to preserve that person's
> privacy."
Thank you, Malcom.
Implemented, with minor changes because this conflicts with other
suggestions that deleting the poster's name would make attribution
(retribution?) impossible.
Marceline Therrien
>From: hon...@googlegroups.com [mailto:hon...@googlegroups.com] On
>Behalf Of Edward Lipsett /t
>Sent: June 30, 2008 17:46
>To: Honyaku Google
>Subject: Re: View this page "FAQ English"
>
>
>on 08/07/01 9:26, Malcolm James wrote:
>
>> Surely there are cases where quoting a small portion of a message
>counts as
>> "fair use". Wouldn't deleting the author's name count as not giving
>proper
>> attribution to the author?
>
>Surely there are such cases.
>However, it is impossible to write a FAQ that will address each and
>every
>situaation, and this is not unreasonable as it is written.
>If you feel you have a better way to phrase it, why not suggest it?
Your original wording makes it seem like this kind of cross posting is
acceptable in a wink-wink nudge-nudge kind of way. Personally, I don't
think it's acceptable in any way, shape or form. Why be so wishy washy
about it?
Change:
" The Internet is a critical part of a professional translator's life and
work, and for that reason spam, confidentiality and privacy are paramount
issues. When someone posts a message to this list, that person retains
copyright to that message. That means, in theory, you should get the
permission of the original poster before copying it anywhere. We all know
that messages get cross-posted without such authorization, but
that doesn't mean we can condone it. We recommend deleting the mail address
of the original poster, and possibly his or her name as well, to preserve
that person's privacy."
To:
" The Internet is a critical part of a professional translator's life and
work, and for that reason spam, confidentiality, privacy and authorship
rights are paramount issues. Messages posted to this list may not be
forwarded to any other recipients, email lists, or boards in whole or in
part without the permission of the original author. Violators may be
permanently banned from this list."
Marceline Therrien
J2E Business Translations
San Francisco, California, USA
Steve Venti
> Your original wording makes it seem like this kind of cross posting is
> acceptable in a wink-wink nudge-nudge kind of way. Personally, I don't
> think it's acceptable in any way, shape or form. Why be so wishy washy
> about it?
Because not everyone would agree with that assertion. Moreover, I
doubt that those of us who tend the list are interested in
implementing Draconian measures such as the one your version suggests.
As Dan Kanagy has mentioned many times in the past, this list and the
people who participate on it seem to be rather good at
self-correcting. That is part of the reason why the FAQ is a FAQ and
not a Terms of Use.
--
Steve Venti, my personal opinion, but speaking as one of several list-minders
Marceline Therrien
>From: hon...@googlegroups.com [mailto:hon...@googlegroups.com] On
>Behalf Of Steve Venti
>Sent: July 01, 2008 13:58
>To: hon...@googlegroups.com
>Subject: Re: View this page "FAQ English"
>
>
>> Your original wording makes it seem like this kind of cross posting is
>> acceptable in a wink-wink nudge-nudge kind of way. Personally, I
>don't
>> think it's acceptable in any way, shape or form. Why be so wishy
>washy
>> about it?
>
>Because not everyone would agree with that assertion.
I'm not sure that I understand what assertion you disagree with.
Do you think that it's acceptable to take material from this list and post it elsewhere?
Steve Venti
> Do you think that it's acceptable to take material from this list and post it elsewhere?
Yes, I do. Otherwise, how would
http://www.saglasie.com/tr/HONYAKU/link.htm or
http://honyaku-archive.org/ have been started or maintained? Of
course, if you think both sites should be shut down, you are free to
suggest it.
And as for the issue of individuals posting material from this list to
other similar lists, just as with what little work I have done at
Wikipedia, what I post to this list is for the benefit of others, who
are free to use it as they see fit.
In fact, what seems to have gotten lost in your line of reasoning is
that this issue came up because there was a need to remind people to
protect the privacy of others, not to protect the IP of others.
--
Steve Venti
sls
> Do you think that it's acceptable to take material from this list and post it elsewhere?
Yes, if it is done in the appropriate manner. :-)
(Please see my related post with the date/time stamp 2008/07/01 09:46).
Regards: Hendrik
--
Marceline Therrien
>From: hon...@googlegroups.com [mailto:hon...@googlegroups.com] On
>Behalf Of Steve Venti
>Sent: July 01, 2008 14:50
>To: hon...@googlegroups.com
>Subject: Re: View this page "FAQ English"
>
>
>
>other similar lists, just as with what little work I have done at
>Wikipedia, what I post to this list is for the benefit of others, who
>are free to use it as they see fit.
>
It is certainly you prerogative to feel that way, but I disagree very strongly.
I don't want to see what I have posted on this list reposted on commercial translation sites, porn sites, or any other sites, for that matter. And I certainly don't want people stealing what I have written and claiming it as their own work. I realize that technologically this may be impossible to achieve, but is that any reason to condone it with a nudge-nudge, wink-wink any more than spam, that other bane of the Internet?
I'm sorry to say that if the moderators don't intend to take a firm stance against unauthorized and unattributed reposting, I will be strongly disinclined to post here anymore, as the potential grief far outweighs the potential benefits.
Marceline Therrien
No you are absolutely not free to use my words as you see fit
Marc Adler
strongly disinclined to post here anymore, as the potential grief far
--
Marc Adler
Austin, TX
لا شيء إلا الضوء
Marceline Therrien
>From: hon...@googlegroups.com [mailto:hon...@googlegroups.com] On
>Behalf Of Marc Adler
>Sent: July 01, 2008 15:45
>To: hon...@googlegroups.com
>Subject: Re: View this page "FAQ English"
>
><hon...@thinkjapanese.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> strongly disinclined to post here anymore, as the potential grief
>far
>
>
>Out of curiosity, what potential grief do you foresee?
>
I would be pretty unhappy if something I posted here reappeared at a
commercial translation site in such a way as to make it appear that I had
any connection to that site, for example.
Having been the victim of plagiarism in my professional life, I don't have
much of a sense of humor about this.
Marceline Therrien
J2E Business Translations
San Francisco, California, USA
*****Do not forward or repost this message without the author's
permission******
Marc Adler
I would be pretty unhappy if something I posted here reappeared at a
commercial translation site in such a way as to make it appear that I had
any connection to that site, for example.
And you think the current language in the FAQ makes false representation okay, but rewording the FAQ will prevent it?
Having been the victim of plagiarism in my professional life, I don't have
much of a sense of humor about this.
--
Marc Adler @ if imitation is the sincerest form of flattery...
Edward Lipsett /t
> if the moderators don't intend to take a firm stance against unauthorized and
> unattributed reposting
Hi, Marceline.
Assuming we have a FAQ that strongly condemns this, and someone does it
anyway. What would you suggest that the list minders do about it?
(This is an honest attempt to open a dialogue, not an attack...)
----------
Edward Lipsett, yet another list-minder
Marceline Therrien
>-----Original Message-----
>From: hon...@googlegroups.com [mailto:hon...@googlegroups.com] On
>Behalf Of Edward Lipsett /t
>Sent: July 01, 2008 17:21
>To: Honyaku Google
>Subject: Re: View this page "FAQ English"
>
>
>on 08/07/02 7:40, Marceline Therrien wrote:
>
>> if the moderators don't intend to take a firm stance against
>unauthorized and
>> unattributed reposting
>
>Hi, Marceline.
>
>Assuming we have a FAQ that strongly condemns this, and someone does it
>anyway. What would you suggest that the list minders do about it?
>(This is an honest attempt to open a dialogue, not an attack...)
>
As stated in the wording that I proposed, if that someone is a member of the
list, they should be banned. Why is unauthorized reposting any more
acceptable to the moderators than spam, which is explicitly prohibited on
the group home page ("Spam will not be permitted.") What do you do when
someone tries to use the list for spam -- you ban him or her. Why not the
same treatment for jerks who repost messages in other forums without author
permission? Why give them carte blanche to steal other people's work as
long as they remove the author's identity?
Marceline Therrien
J2E Business Translations
San Francisco, California, USA
Edward Lipsett /t
> As stated in the wording that I proposed, if that someone is a member of the
> list, they should be banned. Why is unauthorized reposting any more
> acceptable to the moderators than spam, which is explicitly prohibited on
> the group home page ("Spam will not be permitted.") What do you do when
> someone tries to use the list for spam -- you ban him or her. Why not the
> same treatment for jerks who repost messages in other forums without author
> permission? Why give them carte blanche to steal other people's work as
> long as they remove the author's identity?
Offhand (thinking with my fingertips), it seems there are two factors
involved here.
First, spammers are not participants in the list: they do not provide
list-related information, and they do not utilize list information. They
drop off their packages of joy and vanish, and because we have defined the
list as a place for professional translators to share information, thhey
rule themselves out. I can imagine a situation where a translator in good
standing could make a post that would be judged spam by the majority of
subscribers... Should that person be banned? It is unclear, I think.
Second, regardless of what courts in many countries say about copyright and
public lists like this one, not all countries agree. It is common practice
(I didn't say good or bad, merely common) to copy posts; many Internet users
are now used to the idea of posting links instead of content, of rephrasing,
of deleting privacy-related information, etc, but I think most people are
not. Even on a list for professionals, like this one, the majority of
subscribers are probably merely unfamiliar with "best practice" because they
simply don't do it very often.
Should translators be banned because they screwed up? Or should they be
educated?
Assume that we make a decision to ban violators. Who reports a violation?
Presumably to the list minders... Which means we have to run off and look at
the offending post, determine if it really is a violation or not (which
could involve an email exchange), and then ban the violator. That's quite a
bit of work for a list being run as a volunteer effort. It is not
impossible, certainly, but my immediate preference would be to let people
work it out themselves.
Any coments on the above are of course welcome.
Disclaimer: The above represents my current feelings, which are subject to
change at whim.
----------
Edward Lipsett, list minder
Wataru Tenga
"As stated in the wording that I proposed, if that someone is a member
of the list, they should be banned. Why is unauthorized reposting any
Since anyone can read the messages to this list, banning someone would
not prevent them from reposting material. The only option left would
be to make this a closed list, and restrict membership to invitation-
only.
Given the nature of the Internet, I think you may be fighting an
impossible battle.
wataru
Edward Lipsett /t
> The only option left would
> be to make this a closed list, and restrict membership to invitation-
> only.
How would that stop people from copying list content to other places?
Wataru Tenga
> on 08/07/02 9:58, Wataru Tenga wrote:
>
> > The only option left would
> > be to make this a closed list, and restrict membership to invitation-
> > only.
>
> How would that stop people from copying list content to other places?
assumes that the membership is carefully screened to avoid the kind of
riff-raff that would steal content.
I'm not advocating any of that, since I don't really consider it a
problem. But it might be an option for someone wishing to create a
separate list.
wataru
Marceline Therrien
>From: hon...@googlegroups.com [mailto:hon...@googlegroups.com] On
>Behalf Of Edward Lipsett /t
>Sent: July 01, 2008 18:02
>To: Honyaku Google
>Subject: Re: View this page "FAQ English"
>
>
>
>> The only option left would
>> be to make this a closed list, and restrict membership to invitation-
>> only.
>
>How would that stop people from copying list content to other places?
People can't copy what they can't access.
Edward Lipsett /t
> Invitation-only
> assumes that the membership is carefully screened to avoid the kind of
> riff-raff that would steal content.
One of the key points in my prior email was that an awful lot of members in
good standing (ie, not riff-raff) might do so quite unintentionally...
Peter Durfee
> People can't copy what they can't access.
Is this a vote for closing the list to public access, or deleting all
archives?
--
Peter Durfee
du...@gol.com
Tokyo
Marc Adler
Is this a vote for closing the list to public access, or deleting all
archives?
No. It is not.
Marc Adler
spv...@bhk-limited.com
Honyaku
has recently been less self-correcting than formerly, and that more
and
more people, both long-time members and new-comers alike, are less
aware
than before of what constitutes accepted behavior in our community. We
also feel some responsibility for this in that we have been less than
rigorous in enforcing the existing guidelines given in the FAQ.
Therefore, we feel it is in everyone's best interests to refocus the
list by insisting that everyone who posts to the list abide by the
guidelines. That is to say, the guidelines are not optional: they are
rules to be followed when posting to Honyaku, because in doing so we
each help ensure that our messages are easy to read and respond to.
Accordingly, to help us all refocus, some very minor changes have been
made to the FAQ, which we hope everyone will review. Also, we intend
to be very proactive over the coming weeks in pointing out posts that
do not adhere to the guidelines, and in asking everyone to follow
these simple rules:
1. Act responsibly and professionally
2. Include your name in the body of your post
3. First, search the Honyaku archive
4. Ask questions with sufficient context
5. Use meaningful subject lines
6. Use JIS or Unicode but not Shift JIS Japanese.
7. Don't use Japanese-only subject lines
8. Use "New message" (not "Reply") to initiate a new discussion
9. Quote e-mail judiciously and not in entirety
10. Wrap your lines at 70 characters (or so)
11. Respect confidentiality and privacy.
To view the FAQ, click on http://groups.google.com/group/honyaku/web/faq-english
- or copy & paste this link into your browser's address bar if that
doesn't work.
As always, please feel free to post comments, questions, and concerns
either to the list directly or to list for owners and moderators
(Honya...@yahoogroups.com)
Steve Venti, one of three list owners
Kirill Sereda
community
gods cite?
k
Steven P. Venti
> And what would that be? What examples of unaccetable behaviour could the
> gods cite?
Well, since you asked, quite frankly most of your posts fail to abide by
two rather clear and easy-to-understand points in the guidelines.
2. Include your name in the body of your post
9. Quote e-mail judiciously and not in entirety
I'm sure that there are many people who feel that since the list-minders
have let this go for so long, there is no obligation to comply.
And quite frankly, we have no intention of instituting Draconian
measures to ensure that people follow the guidelines. Our goal is to
ensure that everyone is aware of what is expected of them.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Steven P. Venti, one of three list owners
spv...@bhk-limited.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Jean-Christophe Helary
On samedi 14 mars 09, at 10:37, Steven P. Venti wrote:
> And quite frankly, we have no intention of instituting Draconian
> measures to ensure that people follow the guidelines. Our goal is to
> ensure that everyone is aware of what is expected of them.
It seems to me that instead of modifying a FAQ that nobody reads,
replying onlist to the "offenders" with specifics: sign with your
name, don't over quote, would go a long way to reach your objectives.
Jean-Christophe Helary
Kirill Sereda
>>9. Quote e-mail judiciously and not in entirety
please you, dear. No more quotations!
>>Our goal is to ensure that everyone is aware of what is expected of them.
k
-----Original Message-----
From: hon...@googlegroups.com [mailto:hon...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf
martha mcclintock
Please, it really does help those of us who read this stuff to know
who is saying what, without having to decipher who it is from some
obscure email address.
thanks!
martha
Steven P. Venti
> It seems to me that instead of modifying a FAQ that nobody reads,
> replying onlist to the "offenders" with specifics: sign with your
> name, don't over quote, would go a long way to reach your objectives.
That is precisely what we intend to do; announcing the revision of the
FAQ was merely the a stepping stone to getting started.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Steven P. Venti
Mail: spv...@bhk-limited.com
URL: http://www.bhk-limited.com
Blog: http://spventi.wordpress.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Mika Jarmusz
please you, dear. No more quotations!
--
Mika Jarmusz 清水美香
English to Japanese Translator
http://inJapanese.us
Kirill Sereda
Thanks, Martha!
>>where is your name in the body of this post
~
>>from some obscure email address
My "obsure" email address is kvse...@gmail.com
what is yours?
martha mcclintock
well, I am not exactly your dear, but then.
I was not stating that your email address was obscure, simply that
they frequently are on such lists. For example, mine is
mjm...@gmail.com, one of my business names mjm ink, not at all
indicative that i am martha mcclintock to the greater world.
And yes, we can all learn these rules, not so hard, and clearly of
benefit for all,
grins
martha@desperately learning to cut some of the quoted material out of
my replies!
Michael Hendry
> 実名投稿の必要性については...
Some people might not think signing a post with your name is important.
However, this list is "an exchange forum for professional and other
translators working between Japanese and English..." For that reason, a name
is important. If there is no name, or if the name is obviously just a
fictitious name, then the validity of the post (and therefore the validity
of the list) comes into question. We can't police the "real name" aspect of
the request, so we ask for "full name."
The FAQ is a list of things the owners/moderators of Honyaku would like
members to understand and follow in order to keep the list running smoothly
and professionally (i.e., not as a chat room). The three owners and three
moderators are in agreement and are behind these minor revisions.
Michael Hendry, in Newcastle Australia
One of three moderators
Steven P. Venti
> >>2. Include your name in the body of your post
> No problem. No problema, amigo!
You say "no problem," but you fail to comply. An e-mail address in the
headers is not the same as including your name in the body of the post.
> >>9. Quote e-mail judiciously and not in entirety
> Oh, what an infraction! I pledge to never quote anything, anyone, just to
> please you, dear. No more quotations!
Again, you say one thing and then do another.
You are, of course, free to continue to flaunt the guidelines. There are
no penalties for non-compliance.
William Taylor
against Draconia.
“If it ain’t broken don’t try and fix it” -from Will Smith's
Summertime
Regards,
William Taylor
Steven P. Venti
> 実名投稿の必要性については、昨今疑問を感じ始めていたのですが、その辺は
> どうなんでしょう？
The rationale behind asking people to use their real names is a Honyaku
tradition that is fully explained in the FAQ.
We understand that that there are many valid arguments on both sides of
the argument, but we feel very strongly that including your name in the
body of a message is a corollary to acting responsibly and
professionally.
Michael Hendry
> The three owners and three moderators are in agreement...
Sorry, that should have been "four moderators and three owners."
Jeremy Angel
>
> I would like to post one vote in favor of Kirill Sereda and one vote
> against Draconia.
Hi William
I'd be interested to hear what in the list of 11 rules in Steve's post
you regard as so Draconian. They make perfect sense to me, and
following them can only improve the integrity and usefulness of this
list.
--
Jeremy Angel
Nagano, Japan
Carl Freire
Yes, they make perfect sense to me, too. I really fail to see how
people can fail to accept some simple guidelines for exactly those
reasons.
Carl
--
**********
Carl Freire
cfreire /[@]* ix.netcom.com
Tokyo, Japan
Steven P. Venti
> I would like to post one vote in favor of Kirill Sereda and one vote
> against Draconia.
I'll tell you what: You and Kirill and anyone else who feels the same
way are quite free to spin this as an evil list owner trying to impose
his will on the group, if that is how you see it.
My personal opinion, however, is that a great many people who actively
participate on this list are in favor of making sure that all of us,
veterans and new-comers alike, are aware of and comply with the existing
guidelines, because doing so can only improve the usefulness of the list.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Steven P. Venti, speaking as an individual, not as a list owner
John Zimet
These are guidelines to help the list along.
Most of them are common courtesy.
The obvious intent is to make communication easier.
John Zimet
Alan Siegrist
Surely the "Draconian" bit is pure hyperbole. Draco was an ancient Roman
legislator notorious for drafting laws mandating the death penalty for minor
offenses.
No one is calling for the death penalty for failure to sign posts to
Honyaku...
I think a little perspective is needed here, people.
Regards,
Alan Siegrist
Orinda, CA, USA
Edward Lipsett /ht
>
> It seems to me that instead of modifying a FAQ that nobody reads,
> replying onlist to the "offenders" with specifics: sign with your
> name, don't over quote, would go a long way to reach your objectives.
As you are unquestionably aware, we notify offenders offlist... there is really no point in hanging dirty laundry out for the general disgust of the membership.
=====
Edward Lipsett
List minder
Steven P. Venti
> As you are unquestionably aware, we notify offenders offlist
This is slightly different from what I said in response to Jean-Christophe,
but that is because I was not referring to notifying offenders, per se.
If someone fails to follow the guidelines, we might take that as an
opportunity to remind everyone on list of what the guidelines actually
say. But the point is not to castigate offenders; the point is to
reinforce awareness that following the guidelines helps enhance the
usefulness of the list.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Steven P. Venti
Doreen Simmons
replying, and for not writing your name at the bottom of your message.
Read the FAQ!!!
Doreen
>>> are less aware than before of what constitutes accepted behavior in
>>> our
> community
> And what would that be? What examples of unaccetable behaviour could
> the
> gods cite?
>
> k
Doreen Simmons
jz8d...@asahi-net.or.jp
Doreen Simmons
Doreen the finicky
On 2009/03/14, at 12:50, Alan Siegrist wrote:
> Surely the "Draconian" bit is pure hyperbole. Draco was an ancient
> Roman
> legislator notorious for drafting laws mandating the death penalty for
> minor
> offenses.
>
Doreen Simmons
jz8d...@asahi-net.or.jp
Kirill Sereda
haven't seen you helping anyone over the years. You have contributed
NOTHIHNG to this list.
Kirill Sereda
-----Original Message-----
From: hon...@googlegroups.com [mailto:hon...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf
Of Steven P. Venti
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 8:41 PM
To: hon...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Minor revisions to the English FAQ
Kirill Sereda
are quite free to spin this as an evil list owner trying to impose his will
on the group, if that is how you see it.
k
-----Original Message-----
From: hon...@googlegroups.com [mailto:hon...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf
Of Steven P. Venti
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 9:45 PM
To: hon...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Minor revisions to the English FAQ
martha mcclintock
NOW things are getting offensive.
PLEASE take such personal interactions offline.
thank you
Martha
Kirill Sereda
Kirill Sereda
Steven P. Venti
> I am sorry, Steve. I apologize. That was stupid of me,
No sweat, Kirill.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Steven P. Venti
Alan Siegrist
> Try Greek.
Oops, you are right. I hope I got the rest right.
> On 2009/03/14, at 12:50, Alan Siegrist wrote:
>
> > Surely the "Draconian" bit is pure hyperbole. Draco was an ancient
> > Roman legislator notorious for drafting laws mandating the death penalty
> > for minor offenses.
Regards,
Chris Poole
And while we're at it..
"flout" not "flaunt"
Christopher Bruce Poole
spv...@bhk-limited.com
Pursuant to last week's discussion, we received several off-list
suggestions about what we could do with the FAQ, one of which had to
do with reordering the items to make the sequence better reflect the
actual process of posting a message.
This new order does not imply a prioritization; all items are equally
important, and we hope that everyone will make an effort to abide by
all of them.
1. Act responsibly and professionally
2. First, search the Honyaku archive at http://www.honyaku-archive.org/
3. Use "New message" (not "Reply") to initiate a new discussion
4. Use meaningful subject lines; Don't use Japanese-only subject
lines
5. Use either JIS or Unicode, but not Shift JIS Japanese
6. Ask questions with sufficient context
7. Wrap your lines at 70 characters (or so)
8. Quote e-mail judiciously and not in entirety
9. Include your name in the body of your post
10. Confidentiality and privacy
To read more detail on each item, click on
http://groups.google.com/group/honyaku/web/faq-english?hl=en - or copy
& paste it into your browser's address bar if that doesn't work.
Again, this is a change in format only. The actual content of the FAQ
is unchanged at this time.
Also, I would like to place a call for a volunteer to revise the
Japanese language version of the FAQ so that it conforms to the latest
English version. Please send a message to Honya...@yahoogroups.com
if you are willing to help us out with this.
Steve Venti, one of three list owners
Alan Siegrist
Thanks for taking care of the FAQ. If I may point out a minor inconsistency,
please look at item 10:
> 10. Confidentiality and privacy
To match the other items in style, I think we should keep the word "Respect"
at the beginning. It was there in the old version, but it seems to have
wandered off somewhere.
Steven P. Venti
> > Oops
>
> And while we're at it..
> "flout" not "flaunt"
Hmm, so it is. While we are at it, just let me point out in passing that,
whereas I was the one who misused the word flaunt, Alan was the one who
wrote "Oops," which made the comment a bit more difficult to understand
than it might have been if you had quoted a bit more judiciously.
Seriously, though, I hope that everyone will give some thought to
the issue of quoting judiciously as move forward.
We were discussing this on the Honyakumods list recently, and someone
other than myself quite aptly observed that even though most people
have broadband now and it might seem less relevant now than 15 years ago,
having moved beyond broadband to mobile, trimming is a germane issue
once again. Controlling bandwidth, reducing archive storage requirements,
lightweighting digests, and common courtesy are all good reasons to
quote judiciously and not in entirety.
Steven P. Venti
> > 10. Confidentiality and privacy
>
> To match the other items in style, I think we should keep the word "Respect"
Sheesh! I love writing for 1500 proofreaders. <g>
Thank you, Alan. The change has been made.
David J. Littleboy
From: <spv...@bhk-limited.com>
Here's a couple of suggestions. Flames OK, but please, no brickbats.
> 9. Include your name in the body of your post
9. Include your full name in the body of your post.
> 10. Confidentiality and privacy
10. Respect other people's confidentiality and privacy.
11. Don't write anything that you'd be embarrased to have someone else see
five years from now. Honyaku is archived.
David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
Steven P. Venti
> Here's a couple of suggestions.
> 9. Include your full name in the body of your post.
That is what it says in the paragraph that follows the heading, too, so
I've gone ahead and added this. If anyone has, however, a compelling
argument for obviating "full," I'd be more than willing to hear it.
> 10. Respect other people's confidentiality and privacy.
That paragraph addresses not just other people's best interests but
the individual's as well, so I have change it to read: Respect other
people's confidentiality and privacy as well as your own
Again, I'm will to listen to arguments for a different wording.
> 11. Don't write anything that you'd be embarrased to have someone else see
> five years from now. Honyaku is archived.
Let me mull over this one for a while. <g>
Dale Ponte
>for obviating "full,"
"First and last name"?
~
Dale Geoffrey Ponte, Inquire
David J. Littleboy
> Steven writes:
>
>>for obviating "full,"
>
> "First and last name"?
I'd prefer wording that used "given and family names"...
Karen Sandness
Global Englishly yours,
Karen Sandness
Tom Donahue
> Controlling bandwidth, reducing archive storage requirements,
> lightweighting digests, and common courtesy are all good reasons to
> quote judiciously and not in entirety.
The best reason is the one Mika mentioned. If you are looking for
a term in the archives, you will get dozens of false hits from
people quoting entire messages. It really helps if you
quote only the part you are commenting on.
--
Tom Donahue
Edward Lipsett /t
Oh, very nice!
Proper threading would help there, but unfortunately a lot of threading
information is missing... Or wasn't correct in the first place.
----------
Edward Lipsett, Intercom, Ltd.
translation€@intercomltd.com
Publishing: http://www.kurodahan.com
Translation & layout: http://www.intercomltd.com
Corey Moncure
Corey Moncure
David J. Littleboy
>
> Should quotes come at the top of one's response, at the bottom, or inline?
Top posting has the problem that one tends to forget to snip the unnecessary
parts, and finds oneself the subject of snarkiness and the wrath of the
moderators.
Michael Hendry
> Should quotes come at the top of one's response, at the bottom, or inline?
Some people prefer top posting and others prefer bottom posting. I don't
think it matters if you follow guideline #8 (Quote e-mail judiciously and
not in entirety). Anything would be fine if trimming is done thoughtfully.
Michael Hendry, in Newcastle Australia
One of four moderators
Edward Lipsett /ht
If the quote and your response all fit on one screen, I can't see it makes much difference... it's sort of a "green vs purple" debate IMHO.
No doubt many people have opinions.
> Should quotes come at the top of one's response, at the bottom, or inline?
Brian Chandler
excellent example of why you shouldn't top-post on mailing lists.
There are two common conventions, in two different situations...
a. Writing business correspondence (e.g. to the customer of, oh, I
don't know, perhaps a jigsaw puzzle shop)
Write your message to the customer
Follow it with the "message trail" -- all of the messages that led to
this one, in reverse order. It _really_ helps when you are dealing
with lots of customers if they do the same.
b. Writing comments in a mailing list thread
LOOP
Quote a fragment sufficient to give context
Respond to it
END LOOP
This leads to a message that makes sense. Whereas, to quote you above:
"> No doubt many people have opinions.
">
"> > Should quotes come at the top of one's response, at the bottom,
or inline?"
Brian Chandler
http://imaginatorium.org/shop <- yeah, jigsaw puzzles
Carl Freire
>This leads to a message that makes sense. Whereas, to quote you above:
>
>"> No doubt many people have opinions.
>">
>"> > Should quotes come at the top of one's response, at the bottom,
>or inline?"
>
>... really makes _no_ sense.
To put it another way:
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
Cheers,
Carl
--
**********
Carl Freire
cfreire /[@]* ix.netcom.com
Tokyo, Japan
Edward Lipsett /t
> Excuse me quoting your post in full, Ed, but I think this is an
> excellent example of why you shouldn't top-post on mailing lists.
It is an excellent example of why you think you shouldn't top-post.
As I said, many people have opinions, and you are welcome to express yours.
I agree with it, in fact.
But basically we have a choice of recommending bottom-posting and not
getting overly upset about it, or launching strictly enforced regulations
and policing everybody's messages, which will surely make lots of friends.
My position is that recommending bottom-posting and keeping the list
friendly is the optimal choice.
And you?
-----
Edward Lipsett, list minder
Mail to moderators: honya...@yahoogroups.com
Mail to owners: honyak...@yahoogroups.com
Brian Chandler
> But basically we have a choice of recommending bottom-posting and not
> getting overly upset about it, or launching strictly enforced regulations
> and policing everybody's messages, which will surely make lots of friends.
>
> My position is that recommending bottom-posting and keeping the list
> friendly is the optimal choice.
was trying to point out that it isn't a symmetrical "top or bottom"
choice. In practice top posting leads inexorably to the "paper trail"
style, in which all but the top of the message is only for archive
purposes. I really do not think this style is wanted on a mailing
list, because it causes problems like cluttering up archives. So I
think the guidelines could reasonably *require* only selective
quoting, and could *recommend* that usually the best way to achieve
this is by setting your mailreader to respond "below the quotes".
If some people insist on writing upside down, well, we live in an
upside-down sort of world, in which clicking the NEXT button displays
the previous page of transactions (and "my" and "your" are used
interchangeably)...
Brian Chandler
Jigsaw puzzles from Japan
http://imaginatorium.org/shop
>>Isnt'
pls
> Excuse me quoting your post in full, Ed, but I think this is an
> excellent example of why you shouldn't top-post on mailing lists.
Nice, Brian,!
For the archive, let me rephrase this (double-stitched and all that).
1. There is the conversational mailing list with many participants who
communicate with/to each other in any of the possible combinations.
This calls for bottom posting and judiciously limited quoting.
2. There is a conversation between two (or an otherwise small number
of) people that needs to contain the complete record of the
conversation so as to allow one side, which is multitasking - example:
service staff at a software company support desk serving many
customers and taking turns/doing shifts - to quickly reference and
confirm all relevant information at a given moment, and this calls for
top posting and full quoting of previous correspondence.
This should be in every list FAQ... :-)
Regards: Hendrik
--
pls
> To put it another way:
>
> A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
> Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
> A: Top-posting.
> Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
ROFL...
--
pls
> My position is that recommending bottom-posting and keeping the list
> friendly is the optimal choice.
Ed, i think that is a great approach in regards to all guidelines!
No need to fix things that are not broken (like there is one
subscriber whose identity is obvious from several indicators, not the
least his style, his address, and the fact that most of his posts are
full of solid information of use to other subscribers - and who just
so happens to have a habit of signing his messages with "k": nothing
there in need of fixing, if you ask me). ;-)
The owners and moderators of this list have been keeping an eye on
preventing excesses, and thus people like me can enjoy the quality of
the information available on this list and find it an environment that
invites participation.
Thanks!
Regards: Hendrik @ 2 days before 海開き (yes, i'll get wet on Friday)
--