[ale] OT: Security code on Credit/Debit cards revisited

[Greg Clifton]

Very well put, and I think the best post on this thread. Clear written
communication, that actually successfully transmits the meaning of the
writer is difficult, accordingly I think we would do well to give posters
the "benefit of the doubt" regarding their intentions and motives for what
they write and not dump such a load of vitriol. From my read of this thread,
unwarranted assumptions and overly personal attacks were made. Perhaps a
request for clarification rather than and accusation of the OP would have
been more in order. Just my $.02

GC

On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 8:33 PM, Richard Bronosky <Richard at bronosky.com>wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 9:21 AM, Lightner, Jeff <jlightner at water.com>
> wrote:
> > If you look at all the definitions there as well as the synonyms shown in
> the Thesaurus entry at the bottom you'll understand Mike's use of the word
> was correct.
> >
> > To those who tried to distinguish between words I'd invite you to look at
> definition 2 that clearly ties them together:
> > "2.  Discrimination or prejudice based on race."
>
> Jeff, most modern dictionaries shift to stay relevant to modern
> vernacular. There is a good and bad side to this:
> Good - You hear a word used and look it up for clarity. You find a
> definition that expresses the speaker's intent.
> Bad - You are trying to communicate a very specific concept, but
> changes in the meaning of words makes it difficult to do so.
>
> In this case it is particularly bad because for the sake of humanity
> we need to be able to communicate these differences with clarity.
> Genocide is a modern reality. There are people in this world who are
> actually working to solve social problems like genocide. It is
> imperative that they be able to communicate with clarity toward that
> end. If the differences between the words I mentioned earlier (to
> which I should have added bigotry) are unknown, blurred, or ignored it
> makes resolving these social problems impossible. The way you address
> a group of people who are slaughtering another may vary based on the
> offender's rationale. If they believe that they are exterminating a
> genetically inferior group, that is different than if they are
> vindicating an offense on their ancestors. I truly hope no one here is
> childish enough to accuse me of being pro-genocide.
>
> I hope I'm starting to make this complicated point clear. I'm trying
> to get you to understand why it is important to use proper terms. Even
> that single definition 2 that you quoted is flawed! For "prejudice
> based on race" use "racial prejudice". For "discrimination based on
> race" use "racial discrimination". There is a difference between
> prejudice and discrimination. That difference is very important and
> should be understood. Race is sometimes applied to culture, but it
> should be reserved for matters of genealogy. That would allow a
> clarity of "racial prejudice" vs. "cultural prejudice". An example of
> the former would be having a preformed opinion about people with dark
> skin regardless of their attire or demeanor. An example of the latter
> would be having a preformed opinion about a person who wears sagging
> pants regardless of skin color. Is this making any sense at all.
>
> I've not tried justifying any behavior. I feel very strongly about
> racial sensitivity. I believe that racism must be eradicated from the
> modern world. Racists believe they are justified in their abuses
> because their victims are below them in the way a dog is below them.
> You can't negotiate with a person like that. However, a person who
> holds an entire race or culture accountable for the actions of a few
> (aka: stereotyping) can be convinced to change. That requires
> excellent communication skills, patience, and the humility to surpress
> your own emotions.
>
> (not directed at Jeff...)
> Many of the members of this list have failed at this. You can see that
> in Scott Castaline's reaction. If your agenda was to pontificate
> angrily and arrogantly you have succeeded. If your agenda was to have
> a positive impact on the community (which is the reason why many of us
> are involved in software freedom), then you would have been better
> served by showing some tact.
>
> --
> .!# RichardBronosky #!.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.ale.org/pipermail/ale/attachments/20100326/352d92e5/attachment.html