Hi; Since we have drifted so far OT in this thread; ...
On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 20:39 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Saturday 28 April 2007, Dan Lewis wrote: > > But don't we have to be a little careful in using > > jargon? This seems especially true when there is no > > obvious meaning to those who do not know what it means. > > IIRC is another example that I see once in a while. I > > still have no idea what it means. Besides, these > > abbreviations were created because of much slower modems. > > It would be nice to see the actual words once in a while. > > Assuming the reader knows what our jargon is suppose to > > mean when there is evidence to the contrary does not make > > a lot of sense, does it? > > IIRC = If I Remember/Recall Correctly > > IMHO = In My Humble Opinion but this one is a farce because > no opinions are Humble. They should just use IMO > I despise other people's laziness and use of clichés in English -- but of course not my own. If I were king, (IIWK -- maybe) I would have a universal auto-correcter akin to aspell that would allow me to type in a short jargon capitalized word that would immediately be replaced by the full phrase. Similarly it would scan any documents or communications I had received and replace all jargon with the full phrase. It would have to be accurate though, or off with their heads. > Here is just one of many web sites that have this kind of > information available. > > http://www.geocities.com/ikind_babel/babel/babel.html > -- Regards Bill --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
