| |
I think from the whole tone of the subsequent discussion that I should have
put smileys everywhere. I was originally going for the humourous
ribbing--wink wink nudge nudhge--who really cares--i mean, take a look at
the last line I put about grammatical gaffs... This wasn't meant to start a
flame war. I wholeheartedly concur with Larry about the (tm) on things, and
further, Larry and I have agreed on many many things in the past.
Note the following rant is beyond the scope of this post and is now kinda my
brief rant against alotta o-t.d posts that seem to be vindictive and
'tiradical' instead of trying to write thought out responses to other ideas,
for, again I say, I have come to appreciate Larry and what he does in this
community.
I have no idea what's going on here in o-t.d but personal attacks isn't
helping. If my grammar is preventing folks from even spelling things
properly, then seriously, whatever.
We are here for debate. That's that d in o-t.d thing. Sometimes, I like to
be humourous. Sometimes Larry likes to be humourous. Sometimes we all get
it wrong. Sometimes we don't check our wording carefully. It shouldn't
matter that we do. We should do our best and see that, thru our
disagreements, that we keep the idea that the ones we are responding to are
like minded people.
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > > > But would it kill ya to put a Capital C on Christmas?
> > >
> > > No it wouldn't, but it would be incorrect in my view, when referring to
> > > things that happened around that time. We don't celebrate the christian
> > > christmas.
> > >
> > > > I mean, being the (tm) truant for LUGNET(tm) and Guild of Bricksmiths(tm),
> > > > you, Larry, of all people, should realize the vexing incurred by those that
> > > > read something like that.
> > >
> > > It's not a trademarked name.
> >
> > It wasn't specifically the (tm) issue I was referring to. As one of the
> > people who find it vexing when folks wrongly leave off the (tm) off things
> > that should have the (tm), you should appreciate the vexing caused in other
> > folks when the C in Christmas is not capitalized--I was going for an
> > analogy, not the specific.
>
> You have misidentified me, sir. I do not find it vexing in the least when
> people omit the (tm) on things.
You missed the humour, and what I should have said originally was 'there are
those out there who think you're the (tm) truant officer, Larry and to hold
up your position... yada yada yada...'
And then we got into the debate wherein I was just saying that whatever
reasons, it is grammatically correct, but since when do I care about grammar?
> I personally could care less about the entire matter, except for the slight
> fact that I have trademarks that I have invested effort in developing and
> which have a good reputation in the marketplace. The law requires that if I
> want to protect my trademarks I have to periodically remind people that they
> need to have (tm) on them. I prefer that they stay my (or our, in the case
> of the Guild of Bricksmiths(tm)) property, and that they remain associated
> with my (or our) endeavours and not that of others who would sully the brands.
>
> So I remind people, because if I don't, the trademarks lapse. That is an
> unacceptable alternative, although I'd prefer it if the law did not require
> me to remind people. Reminding people is the vexing part. I have to do it in
> the case of (tm), I have no choice. You and John have chosen to bug me about
> this for your own reasons, you chose to do so.
I knew vexing was going to enter sooner or later. I am not John, nor do I
attack people who are athiests and/or don't appreciate my POV. I have
stated many many many times in many many many differnet debates, that people
can believe whatever their little heart desires, as long as what they
beleive does not negatively impact on others.
Aside from that, we can choose to try to be at least gramatically correct.
>
> It's only common courtesy to reciprocate on the (tm) with other trademarks,
> it shows respect to the commercial endeavours of others. Plus it has the
> side benefit that it cuts down on twits flaming me about it if I forget.
>
> I am sorry but christmas is not a trademark, it is not in danger of being
> owned by someone else, and further I have no reciprocal respect for it,
> since christians show me such discourtesy, and so strongly disrespect me and
> my beliefs as to make my life difficult. "As ye reap so shall ye sow", I
> think the saying goes.
Again, for whomever you encountered in your life and whatever brand of false
Christianity they may be following, I'm sorry. As for me, Larry--hey, it's
me. Not necessarily drinking buddies with you at the local pub but we have
had some banter here in the world of LUGNET(tm), and I thought we had a
tacit understanding of each other. Mebee not...
>
> I'm sorry if my lack of respect for christmas and christianity vexes you,
> but personally, I find little to respect in christianity. I do not have to
> use the term as you designate, as it's not a proper noun the way I use it.
> In fact there is much about christianity that is quite improper, using a
> different sense of the word "proper", but I digress.
I find little to respect from any fundamentalist group that pushes its
worldview on others. And my form of Christianity has nothing to do with,
and outright condemns the fundamentalists. However, those feelings aside,
the sky is still blue, the sun still rises in the morning, the moon is made
of cheese, and Christmas is a proper noun (as stated by others)
>
> > If you want to talk about the season following autumn, then it would be
> > winter. If oyu wish to discuss that time of year (usually around December
> > 25) and the holiday in which people sometimes exchange gifts and have a
> > decorated tree in their house, then it's Christmas time.
>
> Disagree. It is not Christmas time unless you are celebrating christmas with
> all the trappings. We don't.
The tree decorated and the present exchange and kids unwrapping them the
morning of Dec 25, and the big dinner, and parties have little to do with my
Lord and Saviour being born 2000+ years ago, and yet it is still Christmas
time. It is what it is, with or without Jesus. Jesus gives significance to
us Christians, but Christmas time in this day and age has about as much to
do with Jesus as the Easter Bunny has to do with his crucifixion.
>
> Certainly if I had a menorah in my house and no hanukah bush, I would not be
> celebrating capital C christmas would I? (note the omission of
> capitalization on hanukah)
I have no idea about Jewish customs. Again, you can be an athiest, you can
be a bhuddist, you can be a moon worshipping fanatic, but Christmas is still
Christmas and it is still capitalized.
>
> > It's still
> > gramatically correct
>
> Is this merely a grammar flame, then? Or something more substantive?
No flames from me, just love writing, listening to the sound of my own voice :)
>
> > to put the capital C on it.
>
> When you yourself have perfect grammar, you are welcome to assert that. Till
> then I suggst that you do not cast the first stone, I think the saying
> goes... or something like that anyway.
Again, I would never cast stones, you can type Christianity however you
want, but know the ramifications. Is like that guy from Police Academy, who
throws the apple core over his shoulder and starts the huge ruckus--'I
wonder how that happened?'
For myself, I prefer to stop the big ruckuses before they become big
ruckuses. That's all this was about.
>
> > > That's three strikes, thanks for playing. :-)
> >
> > I think you fouled out waaay into the left field bleachers with attempted
> > swings on this one :)
>
> Those would be YOUR strikes, you were at bat and you struck out. Nice try at
> twisting things around though.
What I tried to do in my previous post was show that perhaps you were
mayhaps twisting my intent around. I don't think I missed any of the
pitches the first time thru, obviously tho I didn't adequately explain them
properly to get my meaning across.
>
> BTW, a foul that goes into the bleachers isn't an attempted swing, it's a
> swing that actually connected. Just not successfully. I know that and I
> don't even like the sport. If you're going to work baseball analogies, work
> them correctly.
It may have been a swing that connected, therefore not an attempt to be
sure, but it still didn't get the job done.
My favourite baseball quote of all time:
Rebecca Howe (first episode she was on Cheers) (to Sam): "Again, in
baseball parlance--it's the bottom of the ninth, there are two out, you have
2 strikes against you, and no balls...."
Dave
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: slight
|
| (...) You have misidentified me, sir. I do not find it vexing in the least when people omit the (tm) on things. I personally could care less about the entire matter, except for the slight fact that I have trademarks that I have invested effort in (...) (22 years ago, 11-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
225 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
