At 13:43 13-2-2003 -0500, Jon Gabriel wrote:
Must be a cultural difference then. Unlike a certain subset of Americans (of which some people on this list are members, sadly), over here we don't yell "threat" at the first hint of something negative that might happen. Where I live, consequences have to be very grave before mentioning those consequences is called a threat.Jose interpreted my Legal Notice as a "threat", which is a gross exaggeration, as the word "threat" suggests extremely negative consequences.The word "threat" does not suggest _extremely negative_ consequences. It merely identifies negative consequences.
You might consider looking up the word in an English language dictionary to acquaint yourself with proper usage.That is not a *threat*, that is a *disclaimer*. You might consider looking up the word in an English language dictionary to acquaint yourself with proper usage.
I'll be helpful: Threat is defined as "an expression of intention to inflict evil, injury, or damage." (m-w.com) Your "legal notice" essentially says you are not responsible for any damage that might result to others from direct and deliberate actions made by you.
BTW, the definition you give of "threat" proves you wrong, and actually proves that my Legal Notice does not contain any threats; nowhere do I mention any intent to "inflict evil, injury or damage". Damage *might* result from publishing your message elsewhere, but doing damage is not the *intent* behind publishing your message elsewhere.
Only the first part of my Legal Notice ("your replies may be published elsewhere") could possibly be interpreted as a threat, and even then it is only a threat in the definition used by a certain extremely oversensitive subset of the US public.
On a side note, I don't get the impression that anyone on this list actually realises the purpose of including that Legal Notice.
Well, we speak English as our native language. We would be expected to use it correctly,
And, IMO, it's a rather hypocritical sentiment coming from someone who uses the phrase 'zero tolerence for intolerence' as part of his sig line.Personally, I find it extremely funny that you first say that native speakers would be expected to use English correctly, and then manage to make the same spelling error *twice* in the same sentence. It's all the more dumb since you could have simply copied and pasted that particular part of the sentence.
You might consider looking up the various words of your last sentence in an English language dictionary to find out what word you misspelled, and what the proper spelling is.
Jeroen van Baardwijk -- not a native speaker, but better at spelling
_________________________________________________________________________
Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com
LEGAL NOTICE:
By replying to this message, you understand and accept that your replies (both on-list and off-list) may be published on-line and in any other form, and that I cannot and shall not be held responsible for any negative consequences (monetary and otherwise) this may have for you.
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
