On 12/23/2012 09:56 AM, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
2012-12-23 18:09, Karl Williamson wrote:
As another poster said, this quotation
would be considered fair use under USA law.
It was not a quotation but an excerpt posted without permission.
Quotations are allowed when they are needed to back up your statements
or specify what you are commenting on. There was nothing like that in
the posting (nothing that the poster himself had written), and such
behavior should be discouraged.
I completely disagree. I see nothing wrong with his post. Again, this
may be a cultural difference between us.
The post uses only US-ASCII.
When posting something taken literally from a printed source, the source
should be reproduced as exactly as possible. It is surely reasonably to
expect that readers of the Unicode list can deal with Unicode encoded
email, even though email might not be completely Unicode safe in general.
Again, I disagree. I believe this list is for people who are interested
in Unicode, at whatever level of expertise and skill they may be at. If
I were a newbie, and got your response to my first post I ever made
here, I would probably unsubscribe from the list, with a bitter taste in
my mouth about Unicode. This list should not be about driving people
away from Unicode.
I do not believe that either the EM dash nor the miscapitalization of a
word constitute "distorting the text", and I find it difficult to
believe that Jukka really does either.
I do. Playing with scientific names of organisms without knowing their
writing rules is a common sign of bogosity, comparable to using names
that look like Unicode names of characters (instead of common names) but
aren’t correctly written.
And it could have been a simple typographical error.
I have been studying Biology at the local University, and if I made such
an error, the professors might have gently pointed it out, but it would
not be taken as an indication that I didn't know anything.
Therefore I believe that Jukka
was not being honest in his response to the post;
You accused me of bullying, and now you are saying that I was dishonest.
I did no such thing. I said I *perceived* your post to be bullying,
and that I *believed* you were being dishonest based on some deductions,
and I said I could be wrong, citing one example of a way I could be
wrong. Don't distort my text. There is a huge difference in saying
something *is* something versus being clear that this is *my perception*
of how something is. I do not know nor did I claim to know what is in
your mind and heart; only how it came across to me, which I found offensive.
