At 06:54 PM 10/16/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Doug Hayworth wrote in part:
>
><< .... As a general rule, I think it is good to spell out and
>define nearly all such abbreviations the first time they appear in one's
>message. This practice should apply not only to figures of speech (FOS)
>but also the specific field jargon (SFJ) used. This will make it easier
>for new-comers (NCs) to follow discussions. For example, this group uses
> FOS like IMHO and SFJ like TE, ID, YEC, but these rarely get defined >>
>
>One of the more amusing ones is "PC". Is that "politically correct"
>or "process creation"? "ID" can be confused with "identification" and
>"intelligent design". Mix all those together, and it could result in a
>curious discussion.
>
>Wayne
Apparently, people don't want to act on my suggestion here. From the
beginning, the "TE-man" thread failed to include an initial definition for
the abbreviation. At least the initial post should have done so. I think
it's just a good courtesy. Already Wayne has used defined PC as "process
creation" while David defined it as "progressive creation". These two
could be the same thing, or maybe not. How hard is it to type two extra
words in your message to define an abbreviation the first time it is used
therein?
The IMHO one really had me stumped.
Doug
///////////////////////////////////
Doug and Kim Hayworth
2307 23rd Street, Apt 5
Rockford, IL 61108
815-399-1749
///////////////////////////////////
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 16 2000 - 22:56:31 EDT