Slashdot Mirror
Maryland Governor Wants Paper Ballots
supabeast! writes, "Fed up with all the problems in the state's electronic voting system, Maryland Governor Robert Erlich wants the state to scrap the entire system and return to paper ballots. He's threatened to call a special session of the legislature to change the law to allow paper ballots. What makes this particularly interesting is that Erlich is a Republican — the party often maligned for exploiting flaws in electronic systems — and his attempts to clean up Maryland's voting problems are being opposed by Democrats, the party that is usually complaining about electronic voting!"
I believe that the submitter was framing the discussion as a Democrat vs Republican issue when that is really irrelevant to the discussion.
The core of the matter is tha a Governor is switching from Electronic voting back to paper voting. Throwing in the remark about Democrats vs Republicans just seems trollish to me
Good lord, either I haven't had enough coffee, or you're not making any sense. Look up the word malign. It means to maliciously and falsly accuse.
Actually, no, it doesn't. There's nothing "false" necessarily or even usually implicated by the use of the word "malign." Not sure where you get that from, but it wasn't a dictionary.
I'm not saying the GOP is exploiting anything. I'm just wondering why you would make a statement like you did.
Because it is just as true as what was said in the article.
Just answer my first question before you pose one to me.
Why? The article made its statement before I made mine.
Actually, yes, it does.
... without necessarily lying," and then adds other words to use if you wish to suggest falsehoods, such as calumniate.
No, it doesn't.
[malign] necessarily implies false.
No, it doesn't.
That's from dictionary.com, which is based on the Random House dictionary.
That is one (incorrect) definition.
Merriam Webster says this: "MALIGN suggests specific and often subtle misrepresentation but may not always imply deliberate lying."
Also incorrect. I can suggest, but does not necessarily do so.
Cambridge says "to say false and unpleasant things about someone or to unfairly criticize them"
Also incorrect.
Not sure where you got the idea that it doesn't imply false
Well, I am not sure why you are cherry-picking definitions. For example, the second definition on the page you link to is from the American Heritage Dictionary, which says, "To make evil, harmful, and often untrue statements about; speak evil of," which categorically denies the case you are trying to make, as saying it "often" implies untrue statements clearly does not mean it is "necessarily implied." WordNet (which I do not trust, but since it is on the same page) does not mention truthfulness at all, and neither does the New Oxford American Dictionary, which does not mention anything about truthfulness in its definition, then specifically adds "you can malign someone
Oh, and in case you weren't sure, the NOAD comes from the same publisher as the OED, which is widely recognized as the authoritative dictionary of the English language. Unfortunately, I do not have an OED handy to see what they have to say, but the NOAD is the next best thing to it. So unless the OED -- incredibly -- contradicts the NOAD, I win. Sorry.
but in any case, you need to take a refresher course in vocabulary
You first.
Just to make it clear... the democrats aren't the only ones accused of stuff like this... Republicans do stuff too.
Self-referential Sigs are cool on /. these days...
54