Well:
1. What leaves my mouth is what leaves my mouth: it does not carry a
little packet with it labelled "intentions".
2. What enters your ear is what leaves my mouth: it then has a packet
attached to it labelled "interpretations".
Now, we all know that Heather (and Co.) are not ill-intentioned people;
far from it.
However, I, for one (what, surely not Richmond?) have been "guilty" of
sending message, which, while being
largely well-intentioned, have been crafted in such a way that they
might be prone to attracting negative
interpretations.
Anyone wanting far longer, even more pompous lectures about semantics,
semiotics, intentionality and so on and so forth
need look no further: I'm yer man.
Oh: and by the way, your Homework is to write me 10 pages on how one can
detect 'tone' in a written text.
Professor Richmond.
On 16/2/2018 5:37 pm, Bob Sneidar via use-livecode wrote:
I was going to post the same thing.
Bob S
On Feb 16, 2018, at 05:09 , PystCat via use-livecode
<use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
The problem with that, Heather, was I didn't see anything wrong with your tone.
I think someone was reading waaaay to much into your answer and feeling a
little hurt by what had happened to them.
Paul
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
