Timeline for “computer enthusiasts” is not a technical or administrative term and should be rewritten or dropped
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 24 at 7:47 | comment | added | Kamil Maciorowski | @AlMa1r I like precise statements in technical matters where they are worth it (example). Some sentences on the Internet are fuzzy, some people on the Internet are wrong. Some people cannot stand it, some people take it easy. I'm not going to waste your time here anymore. | |
| Feb 24 at 0:34 | comment | added | AlMa1r | I “attacked one phrase”? Oh no; I took one phrase, namely, the first flaw in what your wrote, as it's pointless to read further. It's YOU who probably felt attacked, while all I do is just typing. As for “eristical”, it applies to your own comment. “The point in changing just one part of it” is to value one's own words, unless you prefer to talk meaningless junk just for the purpose of wasting the reader's time, of course. I strongly oppose to talking garbage. If you don't see value in precise statements in technical matters, you can't be helped. Leave fuzziness to poets and politicians. | |
| Feb 23 at 21:12 | comment | added | Kamil Maciorowski | @AlMa1r You picked and attacked one phrase, but now we see that if we wanted things to be strict and meaningful then the whole sentence is to be changed or removed. So what is the point in changing just one part of it? "Do you wish that this community has no value?" is eristical, I can say "do you wish our help pages were as formal as most EULAs?" and it would be similarly exaggerated. My answer to your eristical question is "no". My answer to "does one fuzzy statement make the community lose all its value?" is also "no". | |
| Feb 23 at 18:58 | comment | added | AlMa1r | Concerning “what difference does it make if some part of it is fuzzy or ill-defined”: If a person values his/her own words, he/she shouldn't say or write ill-defined stuff. In technical/engineering matters, he/she should also not say or write fuzzy stuff. Otherwise whatever he/she says or writes has little to no value. Do you wish that this community has no value? | |
| Feb 23 at 18:34 | comment | added | Kamil Maciorowski | @AlMa1r Exactly! I wanted to show that if we want to be precise (you started it) and consistent then the phrase indeed encompasses everyone. So what difference does it make if some part of it is fuzzy or ill-defined? You wrote "feel free to go on and start a new meta question on this", but I see no point, because for me the phrase is fine as it is. It only has meaning if we allow some colloquialness, but then why should "computer enthusiasts" bother us? Our help pages are not legal contracts, IMO a term not present in your dictionary is not a problem. | |
| Feb 23 at 16:43 | comment | added | AlMa1r | Nobody wrote “only”. And at the same time, if you say that X is for Y (e.g., “the Ukraine is for the Ukrainians” or “this WC is for women”), you usually do mean “mostly” or “only”. If you do think that “mostly” or “only” are wrong here in “for computer enthusiasts and power users”, then what you call (allegedly) a preamble would be void of meaning (because the phrase would encompass everyone) and should be dropped altogether. In this case, feel free to go on and start a new meta question on this. | |
| Feb 23 at 15:32 | history | edited | Kamil Maciorowski | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 224 characters in body
|
| Feb 23 at 15:26 | history | edited | Kamil Maciorowski | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 224 characters in body
|
| Feb 23 at 15:18 | history | answered | Kamil Maciorowski | CC BY-SA 4.0 |