Hey, you can talk anyway you like. I was just expressing my personal
opinion. I say "pill-eated" not "pile-eated," but I'll understand either
one. But some of those acronyms leave me with a blank stare. It took me
a month before somebody explained what "IMHO" was supposed to mean.

Gene Hunn.

On Mon, 26 Jun 1995, Michael Price wrote:

> Hi Tweeters & OBOLers,
>
> Eugene Hunn says:
>
> (snip)
> >I beg to differ. I say write "roughwing." Then most everybody knows
> >what you mean. I can type "roughwing" faster than I can type NORW or
> >whatever it is, even discounting the time it takes to try to remember the
> >damn code (time which both writer and reader must invest).
>
> And I beg to insist. It is a matter of *choice* where with a minimum of good
> manners and politeness, the codes need neither intimidate nor bemuse. I have
> no time, though, for the "I disapprove of this, therefore *you* must stop
> doing this." attitude: it is simply counterproductive and divisive. To
> parody Voltaire: Monsieur, though I disagree with your stand, I will defend
> to the--well, I'll defend your right to choose *not* to use the codes ;-)
>
> In addition, unfortunately, one cannot assume "everyone" will understand a
> jargon term such as 'roughwing'. Four letters of upper-case code with an
> objective basis of agreement is in most cases to be preferable to nine
> lower-case letters of a subjective jargon; at least there is an
> authoritative reference for code, whereas when deciphering jargon it is
> necessary either to contact the term's originator for the term's meaning or
> be a member of the in-group for whom the jargon is common and implicitly-
> understood usage.
>
> Will there be a similar campaign of vilification against similarly
> convenient code-words such as BTW, IMHO, FTP, FAQ, etc? Or is it a selective
> case of 'e-mail codes good: bird codes bad'? Can I expect to see our posts
> sanitised of these terms in the near future? Probably not likely; we choose
> our targets, consistency or no consistency.
>
> Michael Price
> Vancouver BC Canada
> michael_price at mindlink.bc.ca
>
> cc OBOL, as the discussion seems to have been posted there too.
>
>