Hello *, On Mon, Oct 17, 2005 at 08:09:59AM +0200, Jens Seidel wrote: > Florian Ernst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb am 16.10.05 23:46:21: > > Do we fix typos and the like in those "historical documents", i.e. in > > transcripts and individual mails? > > Yes we do. See Matt's mail [...]
Oops, very bad google-fu on my part, thanks for the pointer. > Nevertheless I agree that it's not useful to change IRC logs. It's often > very hard to find a single line in such documents which doesn't contain > at least five typos :-) Putting this aside, I still get a bad feeling about correcting those docs. Especially when thinking about debate transcripts the typing / grammar skills / effort of a participant (or rather the lack thereof) might convey a certain message to some readers, which we'd effectively destroy by fixing these mistakes, thus belatedly altering the course of the debate. Of course, I'd personally welcome to have well-formed and neatly typed docs all over the place, but I find it pretty hard to draw a line between e.g. a) obvious typo and b) person didn't know any better... Cheers, Flo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
