Anglican/Episcopal Schism Starting
Manuel
Archbishop of Canterbury, according to PlanetOut.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/po/20050819/co_po/flaepiscopalchurchesseeknewbishop
Manuel
Dennis Lewis
>
>Six Florida Episcopal congregations seek a new bishop from the
>Archbishop of Canterbury, according to PlanetOut.
Well, I'm not sure this could be described as the opening rift in an
Anglican schism. Six congregations in the Diocese of Florida (which
only comprises Northeast Florida and Tallahassee, not Orlando, Tampa
or Miami) couldn't get Bishop Howard to put them under the authority
of a "conservative" bishop, so they're trying to go over his head.
But, at least for now, it appears the six are trying to remain within
the framework of the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion.
One church in the six, Grace in Orange Park, is an interesting case
study. They're sponsoring a mission congregation that's affiliated
with the Anglican Mission in America (rather than the ECUSA) and is
meeting in the Woman's Club building across the parking lot from
Grace's main sanctuary.
Each side on the Gene Robinson debate in the Florida diocese thought
the bishop-elect would be on their side, though since his installation
the pro-Robinsonites appear to be happier with the new bishop.
Ironically, I've heard that members at Grace helped Bishop Howard buy
his current residence (which is valued in excess of $400,000).
Manuel
Dennis Lewis wrote:
> On 19 Aug 2005 12:19:30 -0700, Manuel wrote:
> >Six Florida Episcopal congregations seek a new bishop from the
> >Archbishop of Canterbury, according to PlanetOut.
> Well, I'm not sure this could be described as the opening rift in an
> Anglican schism. Six congregations in the Diocese of Florida (which
> only comprises Northeast Florida and Tallahassee, not Orlando, Tampa
> or Miami) couldn't get Bishop Howard to put them under the authority
> of a "conservative" bishop, so they're trying to go over his head.
> But, at least for now, it appears the six are trying to remain within
> the framework of the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion.
Remember that the Great Western Schism started with the rather
puny-seeming posting of a number of propositions by a monk called
Martin Luther. At the time the propositions were within RC dogma. The
ensuing flare where fur and feather flew led Luther and supporters to
parent a separate church (die Evangelische Kirche) which still exists,
and the RC to brand him a heresiarch and his followers as heretics, and
to excommunicate them. The rest is history.
> Each side on the Gene Robinson debate in the Florida diocese thought
> the bishop-elect would be on their side, though since his installation
> the pro-Robinsonites appear to be happier with the new bishop.
> Ironically, I've heard that members at Grace helped Bishop Howard buy
> his current residence (which is valued in excess of $400,000).
>From the article I gather bishop Howard endorsed the consecration of
bishop Robinson.
Manuel
Chris Waigl
> Remember that the Great Western Schism started with the rather
> puny-seeming posting of a number of propositions by a monk called
> Martin Luther.
Yeah, sure. In 1378.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Schism
Or do you mean the Great Schism, also called the East-West Schism? Try
another 300 years earlier.
(No, the Reformation is not commonly referred to as the "Great Schism"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Schism .)
The rest of your story is as misleading on historical details as your
account of the fall of Latin[1]
ChrisW
what are they teaching in Canada nowadays?!
[1] yeah, I know it has five cases ... let's see ... the vocative case
was a bug
--
blog: http://serendipity.lascribe.net/
eggcorns: http://eggcorns.lascribe.net/
Manuel
Chris Waigl wrote:
> Manuel wrote:
> > Remember that the Great Western Schism started with the rather
> > puny-seeming posting of a number of propositions by a monk called
> > Martin Luther.
> Yeah, sure. In 1378.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Schism
> Or do you mean the Great Schism, also called the East-West Schism? Try
> another 300 years earlier.
Those educated in Roman Catholicism get to learn that there were to
Great Schisms, one with the Orthodox Church at the time you are
pointing at (The Great Eastern Schism, le Grand Schisme d'Orient), and
the one that started in 1378 (The Great Western Schism, le Grand
Schisme d'Occident).
> (No, the Reformation is not commonly referred to as the "Great Schism"
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Schism .)
Wikipedia is not a reference.
> The rest of your story is as misleading on historical details as your
> account of the fall of Latin[1]
> ChrisW
> what are they teaching in Canada nowadays?!
They just keep the kids busy.
> [1] yeah, I know it has five cases ... let's see ... the vocative case
> was a bug
Nope. There were seven: Nominative (Christina), Vocative (Christina),
Accusative (Christinam), Genitive (Christinae), Dative (Christinae),
Ablative (Christina), and Locative (Christina). Vocative was a
different form only for masucline and feminine nouns of the 2nd
declension with the nominative ending -us (with a couple of exceptions
such as deus). Locative was different from the ablative only in a list
of place words.
Manuel
Dennis Lewis
>
>Remember that the Great Western Schism started with the rather
>puny-seeming posting of a number of propositions by a monk called
>Martin Luther. At the time the propositions were within RC dogma. The
>ensuing flare where fur and feather flew led Luther and supporters to
Well, regarding one congregation in the previously referenced sextet,
the previously referenced Grace Church in Orange Park, a casual
visitor sitting in on a parish meeting would get the impression they
are chomping at the bit to leave the Episcopal Church USA.
During a parish meeting the first Sunday after Gene Robinson was named
bishop of New Hampshire, there was agreement that the word "Episcopal"
was going to be dropped from the church logo. Well, Robinson has been
bishop of New Hampshire for two years: <http://www.amazingrace.org/>.
Evidently the Episcopal Diocese of Florida really is the titleholder
on the church's property because at that same meeting there was talk
of the possibility of the diocese selling the property to the
congregation for the nominal sum of $1, allowing them to affiliate
with one of the "non-revisionist" bishops who heads a diocese below
the equator.
Even if the bishop at that time had been amenable to the idea, there
wouldn't have been time to finalize such a plan before the new bishop
was installed.
And, at this point in their lives, I suspect that the clergy at Grace
are aware of the benefits of staying with the Episcopal Church's
pension plan -- except for the new guy who wasn't ordained by the
ECUSA and who went across the parking lot to set up an AMiA mission
when the new bishop revoked permission for him to serve as a rector in
an Episcopal church in the Diocese of Florida.
Mike McManus
> Chris Waigl wrote:
>>[1] yeah, I know it has five cases ... let's see ... the vocative case
>>was a bug
> Nope. There were seven: Nominative (Christina), Vocative (Christina),
> Accusative (Christinam), Genitive (Christinae), Dative (Christinae),
> Ablative (Christina), and Locative (Christina).
And which of these was supposed to bring her mother the axe?
--
"So I'm an old hand at being banged about in the middle of the
night. Occasionally by earthquakes." -- Nick Fitch on soc.motss
Mike McManus, Rochester NY
Dennis Lewis
>
>bishop Robinson.
I don't know whether he supported or opposed Robinson during the vote,
but now his position appears to be "What's done is done, so let's just
accept it and move forward."
David W. Fenton
news:430795c5...@news.west.earthlink.net:
> chomping at the bit
This is not really an eggcorn -- don't know what to call it -- but
the correct phrase is "champing at the bit." Of course, more people
say "chomping" these days, so maybe that's no longer the preferred
usage.
--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc
Chris Waigl
> d...@spry-net.com (Dennis Lewis) wrote in
> news:430795c5...@news.west.earthlink.net:
>
>
>>chomping at the bit
>
>
> This is not really an eggcorn -- don't know what to call it -- but
> the correct phrase is "champing at the bit." Of course, more people
> say "chomping" these days, so maybe that's no longer the preferred
> usage.
Oh, but it is. Go here
<http://eggcorns.lascribe.net/english/269/chomp-at-the-bit/> and you get
Arnold's wonderful Language Log post "Chomping at the font" for free.
ChrisW
who has updated the entry and done a bit of searching for things people
have been chomping at... and found:
* chomping at the chance
* chomping at the opportunity
* chomping at the prospect to practice economics rather than teach it
* chomping at the bid
* chomping at the "bait"
and
* a slyly Canadian chomp at the hand that feeds you (ok, merely funny,
not really odd)
but who'd better let this sleeping can of worms lie
Arnold Zwicky
david fenton <dXXXf...@bway.net.invalid> wonders:
>d...@spry-net.com (Dennis Lewis) wrote in
>news:430795c5...@news.west.earthlink.net:
>> chomping at the bit
>This is not really an eggcorn -- don't know what to call it -- but
>the correct phrase is "champing at the bit." Of course, more people
>say "chomping" these days, so maybe that's no longer the preferred
>usage.
it's most of the way to being a standard usage, with its eggcorn days
behind. it's in the eggcorn database, and is discussed at greater
length on the Language Log:
"Chomping at the font"
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002018.html
zotling
Michael Thomas
> d...@spry-net.com (Dennis Lewis) wrote in
> news:430795c5...@news.west.earthlink.net:
>
>> chomping at the bit
>
> This is not really an eggcorn -- don't know what to call it -- but
> the correct phrase is "champing at the bit." Of course, more people
> say "chomping" these days, so maybe that's no longer the preferred
> usage.
Oh. I always say biting at the chomp.
--
Michael Thomas (mi...@mtcc.com http://www.mtcc.com/~mike/)
E Unum Pluribus: California out of the US.
Mike McKinley
news:bsNNe.34456$EX....@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
> Manuel wrote:
>> Chris Waigl wrote:
>>>[1] yeah, I know it has five cases ... let's see ... the vocative case
>>>was a bug
>> Nope. There were seven: Nominative (Christina), Vocative (Christina),
>> Accusative (Christinam), Genitive (Christinae), Dative (Christinae),
>> Ablative (Christina), and Locative (Christina).
> And which of these was supposed to bring her mother the axe?
Because I'm not one of your FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANS!!!!!!!!!!!
Scott Safier
> "David W. Fenton" <dXXXf...@bway.net.invalid> writes:
>> d...@spry-net.com (Dennis Lewis) wrote in
>> news:430795c5...@news.west.earthlink.net:
>>
>>> chomping at the bit
>>
>> This is not really an eggcorn -- don't know what to call it -- but
>> the correct phrase is "champing at the bit." Of course, more people
>> say "chomping" these days, so maybe that's no longer the preferred
>> usage.
>
> Oh. I always say biting at the chomp.
Thank you for not biting at the Champ. (he may bite back)
--
Scott http://www.pink-triangle.org/scott
AOL IM: CorwinScot YahooIM: CycleMuscle
"Stand firm for what you believe in until or unless logic or experience prove
you wrong. Remember, when the emperor looks naked the emperor is naked. The
truth and a lie are not sort of the same thing. And there's no aspect, no
facet, no moment of life that can't be improved with pizza." -- Daria
David W. Fenton
news:de8ofp$cj1$1...@news.Stanford.EDU:
Could I make a suggestion for your Google Groups citations? Cite the
original message with the messageID, rather than just the Google
Groups URL. The reason for that is to avoid the problem that
happened with Deja.news URLs, which used the message number (which
was specific to Deja's Usenet server), and when Google took over and
changed the organization of the archive, the Deja URLs all became
obsolete. There is no direct way of looking up an article by
MessageID except by advanced search, but given that MessageID is an
immutable part of the content, any future archive ought to allow you
to find the articles even when the Google-specific URLs have
vanished into the ether.
I also think the better Google Groups URL is the one that takes you
directly to the single article, in the case of Dennis's post:
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.motss/msg/804ceb949ff7f652
If a reader wants to see the context, it's easy enough to get to.
And, indeed, the URL you cite goes to *my* reply to Dennis's
message, rather than to Dennis's.
(all of the above is meant as constructive criticism to make the
eggcorn database a better permanent resource, rather than just being
nasty quibbling for the sake of cticicizing)
Christian Hansen
<dXXXf...@bway.net.invalid> wrote:
>(all of the above is meant as constructive criticism to make the
>eggcorn database a better permanent resource, rather than just being
>nasty quibbling for the sake of cticicizing)
cticicizing (or "cticicising" as we spell it here Across the Pond [how I hate
that phrase!]) must be an orthographic first.
Chris "Is the 'c' silent, or the 't'? Perhaps both?" Hansen
--
Chris Hansen | chrishansenhome at btinternet dot com
|http://www.hansenhome.demon.co.uk or
|http://www.livejournal.com/users/chrishansenhome/
|"Ah, ma chère! J'adore lardons!" Mike McKinley
|"That's an L, not an H." Jack Hamilton
Mike McKinley
news:Xns96BA902C0DF8Cdf...@216.196.97.142...
> (all of the above is meant as constructive criticism to make the
> eggcorn database a better permanent resource, rather than just being
> nasty quibbling for the sake of cticicizing)
Oh, Davexed! I'm so disappointed that you're mellowing.
What's next? A warm and fuzzy Arne?
Chris Waigl
> cticicizing (or "cticicising" as we spell it here Across the Pond [how I hate
> that phrase!]) must be an orthographic first.
>
> Chris "Is the 'c' silent, or the 't'? Perhaps both?" Hansen
Palatali[z|s]ed.
ChrisW
who just got a pronunciation lesson on the name "Maciej"
Arnold Zwicky
david fenton <dXXXf...@bway.net.invalid> suggests:
>zwi...@Turing.Stanford.EDU (Arnold Zwicky) wrote in
>news:de8ofp$cj1$1...@news.Stanford.EDU:
>> it's most of the way to being a standard usage, with its eggcorn
>> days behind. it's in the eggcorn database, and is discussed at
>> greater length on the Language Log:
>> "Chomping at the font"
>> http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002018.html
>Could I make a suggestion for your Google Groups citations?
i had a moment of confusion here, because the LLog piece has no google
groups citations. then i realized you were referring to the links in
the eggcorn database, in particular the link to a posting of dennis
lewis's on soc.motss.
after five months, i have no recollection of what method i used for
inserting this link. (it's even possible that chris w. put the google
groups link in for me.) what i do these days is paste in the links
provided by google searches, except for stuff i've read first-hand, as
it were, on soc.motss, sci.lang, or ADS-L, or in a newspaper or
magazine, in which case i now mention the author and the date and the
content, which should be enough information for someone to find the
original, if it's available in an archive, so that they can check out
the context.
>Cite the
>original message with the messageID, rather than just the Google
>Groups URL.
for groups i don't read myself, this makes several more steps in
retrieval for me. i balance this extra effort on my part against the
effort of the (very) occasional readers who want to see the original
quotations for themselves. ok, i'm selfish.
zotling
Chris Waigl
> david fenton <dXXXf...@bway.net.invalid> suggests:
>
> >Could I make a suggestion for your Google Groups citations?
>
>
> after five months, i have no recollection of what method i used for
> inserting this link. (it's even possible that chris w. put the google
> groups link in for me.)
Indeed, I did.
When an entry gets mentioned here or in another venue I read, or if I
see that someone else links to it, I usually give it a once-over. After
over 400 eggcorns, the three of us who have done the bulk of the work
seem to have found some sort of standard format (how many cites to
provide, how to identify them, when to add an explanatory note, and what
to say ...). But the earlier ones sometimes could do with more examples,
or some cleaning-up.
I think I have some idea now how much editing I can do without upsetting
the original poster. Arnold for example doesn't seem to mind it if I
just silently add examples or even do a bit or reformatting. With
others, or if I add something substantial, I add a note that it was me
who did some editing. In a few cases I'll even add material in a comment
(yesterday, for example, I did just that, on "without further adieu").
> what i do these days is paste in the links
> provided by google searches, except for stuff i've read first-hand, as
> it were, on soc.motss, sci.lang, or ADS-L, or in a newspaper or
> magazine, in which case i now mention the author and the date and the
> content, which should be enough information for someone to find the
> original, if it's available in an archive, so that they can check out
> the context.
>
> >Cite the
> >original message with the messageID, rather than just the Google
> >Groups URL.
I had actually given some thought to this issue. And fundamentally,
David is right. Identifying Usenet quotes by the msg-ID would be the
proper thing to do. It also bugs me a bit to enter links to Google-beta
-- one day they'll drop the "beta", I expect.
But there are two reasons for me to wait and see, and keep the Google
Groups links the way they are, for the time being.
The first is that I trust Google not to create major link-breakage when
they go to their definite version. Once they do that, some editing will
be necessary anyway, and maybe there'll be a way to do it in bulk on the
database.
> for groups i don't read myself, this makes several more steps in
> retrieval for me. i balance this extra effort on my part against the
> effort of the (very) occasional readers who want to see the original
> quotations for themselves. ok, i'm selfish.
The second is what Arnold alludes to, here -- and I don't think at all
that he is selfish. Entering nearly a dozen of eggcorns within a day or
two -- as Arnold just did -- takes time and, I find, quite a bit of
concentration. The easier and more mechanical it is to enter the cites,
the better. I'm now much faster than I was in the beginning, but still,
sometimes something about the eggcorn or the character of the cites you
find bugs you, and this slows you down. (I wouldn't do it without a
decent clipboard utility any more, which allows me to copy several items
in succession -- excerpt, URL, date ... -- into the clipboard and then
to retrieve them one by one and paste them into the entry form.) The
fewer clicks the better. And right now, the way the Google Groups links
appear is the way it is easiest to do. I do provide dates now, and the
name of the group, so finding the post should always remain possible.
Usenet cites do have the advantage of being more permanent than random
web hits anyway. Many of the sites we link to might go offline in a day,
and newspaper articles may disappear, completely or into for-pay
archives. Whereas Usenet is, at least for the moment, completely
archived somewhere as-is.
ChrisW
David W. Fenton
> in article <Xns96BA902C0DF8Cdf...@216.196.97.142>,
> david fenton <dXXXf...@bway.net.invalid> suggests:
[]
> >Cite the
> >original message with the messageID, rather than just the Google
> >Groups URL.
>
> for groups i don't read myself, this makes several more steps in
> retrieval for me. . . .
If you're using Google Groups for your citation, it's two clicks
away: View Options then Original.
> . . . i balance this extra effort on my part against
> the effort of the (very) occasional readers who want to see the
> original quotations for themselves. ok, i'm selfish.
Well, I don't see it as that big a deal to find the MessageID for
citations that already point to Google Groups. And the MessageID
makes it a permanent citation and not subject to ambiguity.
I just don't see what's difficult about it -- it would seem to me to
be nothing more than basic reliable scholarship to want the citation
to be as non-volatile as possible.
But I guess others don't have the same standards for web-published
research as for paper research.
David W. Fenton
news:430a5bb5$0$2212$79c1...@nan-newsreader-05.noos.net:
> Arnold Zwicky wrote:
>> david fenton <dXXXf...@bway.net.invalid> suggests:
[]
>> >Cite the
>> >original message with the messageID, rather than just the
>> >Google Groups URL.
>
> I had actually given some thought to this issue. And
> fundamentally, David is right. Identifying Usenet quotes by the
> msg-ID would be the proper thing to do. It also bugs me a bit to
> enter links to Google-beta -- one day they'll drop the "beta", I
> expect.
I was *not* suggesting changing the URL citation format, except to
use accurate URLs (the example in question pointed to the wrong
article), and to use the shortest possible URL (the one that takes
you to the message alone, outside its original threaded context; I'm
ambivalent on that one, as I can see an argument made for seeing it
in context, but I hardily dislike the "improved" Google Groups UI
for threaded view, which I find much harder to read).
I was suggesting that in addition to a Google Groups URL (whichever
format was chosen), that the MessageID be provided as text, just in
case the links ever go stale, or in case someone wanted to look up
the article on a *different* archive without having to go to Google
Groups to get the MessageID.
> But there are two reasons for me to wait and see, and keep the
> Google Groups links the way they are, for the time being.
>
> The first is that I trust Google not to create major link-breakage
> when they go to their definite version. Once they do that, some
> editing will be necessary anyway, and maybe there'll be a way to
> do it in bulk on the database.
They've already made a change that breaks backward compatibility.
For a long time Google Groups maintained (via redirects) the
external interface that allowed pulling up an article by MessageID.
I know this because my newsreader, xNews, had it hardwired into it
to offer the opportunity to go to Deja.com for articles missing from
my local news server's spool. Until about 6 months ago (or maybe a
year; in any, quite a long time after they took over the Deja.com
archive), this functionality still worked, due to Google Groups
having kept the Deja.com domain and having redirected it to Google
Groups, and keeping the old script in place. When they reorganized
the storage of the articles, they made no effort to maintain
backward compatibility to this interface, which allowed the
construction of extrenal links into the archive from nothing more
than the article's MessageID.
So, I'm not so sanguine about trusting Google -- they've already
demonstrated that they will break an existing interface when they
re-organize their data store.
>> for groups i don't read myself, this makes several more steps in
>> retrieval for me. i balance this extra effort on my part against
>> the effort of the (very) occasional readers who want to see the
>> original quotations for themselves. ok, i'm selfish.
>
> The second is what Arnold alludes to, here -- and I don't think at
> all that he is selfish. Entering nearly a dozen of eggcorns within
> a day or two -- as Arnold just did -- takes time and, I find,
> quite a bit of concentration. The easier and more mechanical it is
> to enter the cites, the better. I'm now much faster than I was in
> the beginning, but still, sometimes something about the eggcorn or
> the character of the cites you find bugs you, and this slows you
> down. (I wouldn't do it without a decent clipboard utility any
> more, which allows me to copy several items in succession --
> excerpt, URL, date ... -- into the clipboard and then to retrieve
> them one by one and paste them into the entry form.) The fewer
> clicks the better. And right now, the way the Google Groups links
> appear is the way it is easiest to do. I do provide dates now, and
> the name of the group, so finding the post should always remain
> possible.
But you're citing a search result context, not an article. The URL
format I suggested (as separate from the citation of the raw
MessageID) is the one that most directly takes you to the article
the citation comes from.
> Usenet cites do have the advantage of being more permanent than
> random web hits anyway. Many of the sites we link to might go
> offline in a day, and newspaper articles may disappear, completely
> or into for-pay archives. Whereas Usenet is, at least for the
> moment, completely archived somewhere as-is.
As long as you have the MessageID, there is the chance of finding
the information, even long after Google Groups ceases to exist. As a
scholar, it is important to me to have such resources be as
permanent as possible.
And it's just like when you're taking research notes from a source
you're not likely to revisit -- if you don't get it down the first
time round, it's never going to get put in after the fact. I don't
see the issue with looking up the MessageID on Google Groups -- it's
2 mouse clicks once you've viewed the original article.
Robert S. Coren
David W. Fenton <dXXXf...@bway.net.invalid> wrote:
>I hardily dislike the "improved" Google Groups UI
I think that might be one. (It didn't help that I first read it as
"hardly".)
--
---Robert Coren (co...@panix.com)------------------------------------
"[T]he new Bibliothèque Nationale...seems to have been designed by a
committee made up of Michel Foucault, Jacques Tati, and the
production designer of _The Man from U.N.C.L.E._" --Adam Gopnik
Jed Davis
> after five months, i have no recollection of what method i used for
> inserting this link.
But did you get tested together first?
--Jed
--
"When I was one of the devil's lesbians, my headmistress Countess Clitoria
would reward me with hot tubs and vacations to Spain and Greece. I'm sorry
you're still at the toaster level. You must do your vampirizing only in scummy
out-of-the-way places." -- Mother Bernadette Strange <exle...@wowmail.com>
Lee Rudolph
>I hardily dislike
You're just teasing ChrisW, aren't you?
Lee Rudolph (and, no doubt, you're also a flapper)
Chris Waigl
> I was *not* suggesting changing the URL citation format, except to
> use accurate URLs (the example in question pointed to the wrong
> article),
Ah, okay, I understood you as saying that the URL _you_ suggested
pointed to the wrong article. I've corrected that.
> and to use the shortest possible URL (the one that takes you to the
> message alone, outside its original threaded context;
... and had another look at that. Indeed, those Google chaps hide lots
of vital navigation behind the confusing "show options". For what it's
worth, I'll go those two clicks further in the future and link to
individual articles.
> I'm ambivalent on that one, as I can see an argument made for seeing
> it in context, but I hardily dislike the "improved" Google Groups UI
> for threaded view, which I find much harder to read).
This looks like a variant of Hartman's Law of Prescriptive Retaliation
<http://www.kith.org/logos/words/lower3/hhhyphen.comments.html>.
"Every article or statement that criticizes the Eggcorn Database is
bound to contain at least one eggcorn."[1]
As for Google Groups, I agree with this poster from
alt.adjective.noun.verb.verb.verb:
----
[...]
alt.new.layout.clinks.clanks.clunks
alt.two.columns.confuse.mess.dislike
alt.new.parsing.breaks.crashes.die!
alt.hidden.quotes.dislike.breaks.annoys
alt.monospaced.text.dislike.breaks.annoys
alt.colorful.names.annoys.annoys.annoys
alt.graphical.designer.fire.fire!.fire!!
alt.yahoo-ish.groups.dislike.!need.!use
alt.usenet-ish.archive.lost.hidden?.forgotten?
alt.new.google-groups.throw-out.trash.?recycle
alt.google-ish.employees.appeal.appeal.appeal
[...]
<http://groups.google.com/group/alt.adjective.noun.verb.verb.verb/msg/8dea9c8460446df0>
----
ChrisW
but despite of msg-IDs being the right thing to cite, I'll _not_ litter
the visible entries with them
[1] Maybe I'll add a footnote to hardship»heartship.
Mike McKinley
news:430aff81$0$29514$79c1...@nan-newsreader-07.noos.net...
> David W. Fenton wrote:
>> I was *not* suggesting changing the URL citation format, except to
>> use accurate URLs (the example in question pointed to the wrong
>> article),
> Ah, okay, I understood you as saying that the URL _you_ suggested
> pointed to the wrong article. I've corrected that.
Darling, no good deed goes unpunished.
Arnold Zwicky
david fenton <dXXXf...@bway.net.invalid> bitches:
>I just don't see what's difficult about it -- it would seem to me to
>be nothing more than basic reliable scholarship to want the citation
>to be as non-volatile as possible.
and giving the newsgroup name, poster's name, and date is inadequate
for this purpose?
>But I guess others don't have the same standards for web-published
>research as for paper research.
yeah, my standards are deplorable.
zotling
David W. Fenton
> David W. Fenton wrote:
>> I'm ambivalent on that one, as I can see an argument made for
>> seeing it in context, but I hardily dislike the "improved" Google
>> Groups UI for threaded view, which I find much harder to read).
>
> This looks like a variant of Hartman's Law of Prescriptive
> Retaliation
><http://www.kith.org/logos/words/lower3/hhhyphen.comments.html>.
>
> "Every article or statement that criticizes the Eggcorn Database
> is bound to contain at least one eggcorn."[1]
Don't we locally refer to that as Coren's Law?
Jed Davis
> Chris Waigl <cwa...@free.fr> wrote in
> news:430aff81$0$29514$79c1...@nan-newsreader-07.noos.net:
>>
>> This looks like a variant of Hartman's Law of Prescriptive
>> Retaliation
>><http://www.kith.org/logos/words/lower3/hhhyphen.comments.html>.
>>
>> "Every article or statement that criticizes the Eggcorn Database
>> is bound to contain at least one eggcorn."[1]
>
> Don't we locally refer to that as Coren's Law?
An instance of the universally quantified Coren's Law, perhaps.
See also: "Honi soit qui mal y pense."
--
(let ((C call-with-current-continuation)) (apply (lambda (x y) (x y)) (map
((lambda (r) ((C C) (lambda (s) (r (lambda l (apply (s s) l)))))) (lambda
(f) (lambda (l) (if (null? l) C (lambda (k) (display (car l)) ((f (cdr l))
(C k))))))) '((#\J #\d #\D #\v #\s) (#\e #\space #\a #\i #\newline)))))
Ann Burlingham
> I just don't see what's difficult about it -- it would seem to me to
> be nothing more than basic reliable scholarship to want the citation
> to be as non-volatile as possible.
>
> But I guess others don't have the same standards for web-published
> research as for paper research.
Hey, David, I don't think they're actually stopping anyone from
contributing to the eggcorn database. Even people with *rilly* *high*
*standards*.
--
What use was it having all that money if you could never sit still
or just watch your cattle eating grass?
- Alexander McCall Smith, _The No.1 Ladies' Detective Agency_