Unrelated mostly but does anyone have any idea why Agora's offices mostly end with "or" instead of "er"?
On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 8:29 PM, Nic Evans <nich...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 06/29/2017 12:49 PM, CuddleBeam wrote: > >> >Spivak is personally important to me. I don't think I've overstated my >> feelings on this matter in the least. >> >> OK. It's alright to have that. >> > I don't need your approval. > >> I'm just curious how that is compatible with what you've stated here: >> http://www.mail-archive.com/agora-discussion@agoranomic.org/msg36544.html >> >> >Inclusivity: Language is part of culture and identity, and I'm not >> comfortable codifying Agora's >> >culture to be so exclusive. We already have measures against ambiguity >> that don't disavow entire >> >tongues. >> >> Wouldn't enforcing Spivak be making it "exclusive"? Aren't there other >> (potentially culturally-influenced) ways to express yourself? Or are those >> not alright if they don't include Spivak? >> > > I wasn't speaking in absolute terms, at some point between 'these words > are prefered' and 'this entire class of communication is the prestige > system' you cross from a difference of degree to a difference of quality > (of course, the line is impossible to really suss out). > > We already have prefered words to some degree. 'Reportor' is defined, but > it's not prohibited to use synonyms, translations, circumlocutions, or > encipherments if other players deem them not ambiguous. But if you > constantly avoided keywords, other players might lobby you to stop. In the > same vein, I don't support punishments for not using Spivak, but I'm still > going to lobby for its usage. > > Broader terms: Culture and individuality is negotiated between > individuals. When communicating with others, especially when communiating > _about_ them, there needs to be compromise to please both sides. Speak only > how you prefer, and you risk hurting them. Speak only how they prefer, and > you risk hurting yourself. > > And the personal note: I'm a single Agoran, so my opinion is ultimately my > own. But Spivak represents inclusivity to me, by circumventing English's > need to either pre-categorize people, or have them explicitly categorize > themselves. Symbolically, losing that system feels like a loss of an ideal. >
