> Blocking mail relayed through tor is a solution with minimal on-going costs
> and minimal collateral damage, so I believe it's the solution that should be
> used here.
Works for me, and the arguments make sense. Not that I'm writing much
to any of the lists these days, but anyway: support++.
> Come on, the only possible conclusion of this line of reasoning is
> that communication between two people is impossible.
Not at all. Humans communicated quite successfully long before
dictionaries or grammarians came about. A large portion of one's
vocabulary is learned through a mixture of
> Interestingly enough, "humanity" has "man" in it too, but like
> "mankind", its origins have nothing to do with gender.
FWIW, perception is not based on etymology.
"chairman" is treated as gender-specific because it is easily read as
"chair" + "man", i.e., the man leading the organisation. W
> I think that is slightly misleading, in that a construction where the
> gender of the user is implied can't really be neutral. A better way to
> phrase it could be something like this:
>
> "The world is made of men and women. Please use gender-neutral
> constructions in your writing. This i
> > Language shapes thought.
>
> Any experienced linguist will tell you that language is essentially
> *random*. Letting it shape your thoughts is nuts, and indicates you
> aren't really thinking.
I think what was meant here was "language shapes perception". That is,
the speaker's language shap
5 matches
Mail list logo
