..And they better hurry since that show
("Boston Legal") is in it its final, truncated, season.
It was already covered in The Paper Chase...oh wait, I'm giving away my age again.
That bogus "deadline" is a canard! Besides the Paper Chase, "Boston Legal" was also preceded by "L.A. Law", and probably others too numerous to remember; they can *always* make a sequel.
[quote:] "It's not bad news, it's good news."
[comments about it:]
Right! Never mind which one the writer thinks is good/bad!
I realize this is not wikipedia (see NPOV), but how hard would it have been, to
use some more neutral terminology, (in the original, not the immediate
parent here) like,
"on the one hand..." and "then again, on the other hand..."?
This would have been an alternative to framing it as
"The bad news:..." and then "The good news:...";
one way seems to insist on revealing (and almost, emphasizing)
which side the writer is on;
while the "NPOV" approach (by contrast) tries to just
emphasize reporting what has happened (the "news"),
and tends to leave it up to the
reader to figure out (or already know, or misinterpret it/slash,
get it wrong... whatever)
what is true, and what to believe, what to think, what to
consider interesting, etc.
If it's an idea whose time has come, then I don't care who
it is that reports (conveys) it; and I don't care what his/her
opinions are. Well, OK, I might care to try to determine whether
the reporter is someone who'd be tempted to lie just to
score a point, but I mean, if we had some kind of "trust but
verify" possibility - which IMHO exists more today (with the
internet, and blogs, and ATMs and libraries... etc.)
than it did 10 or 20 generations ago - then I'd prefer
"just the facts").
Just my 0.02... from Mike Schwartz Glendale, AZ.
> "The first recorded talk by Richard Stallman on free software was in 1986, so..."
umm, maybe that's right if you only count live gigs. However, I seem to recall that there was an interview of RMS in some (paper) magazine in 1985 - I think it was "Computer Language" magazine. Just my 0.02. - Mike Schwartz
Slashdot Mirror
..And they better hurry since that show ("Boston Legal") is in it its final, truncated, season.
It was already covered in The Paper Chase...oh wait, I'm giving away my age again.
That bogus "deadline" is a canard! Besides the Paper Chase, "Boston Legal" was also preceded by "L.A. Law", and probably others too numerous to remember; they can *always* make a sequel.
[quote:] "It's not bad news, it's good news." [comments about it:] Right! Never mind which one the writer thinks is good/bad! I realize this is not wikipedia (see NPOV), but how hard would it have been, to use some more neutral terminology, (in the original, not the immediate parent here) like, "on the one hand..." and "then again, on the other hand..."? This would have been an alternative to framing it as "The bad news: ..." and then "The good news: ...";
one way seems to insist on revealing (and almost, emphasizing)
which side the writer is on;
while the "NPOV" approach (by contrast) tries to just
emphasize reporting what has happened (the "news"),
and tends to leave it up to the
reader to figure out (or already know, or misinterpret it /slash,
get it wrong... whatever)
what is true, and what to believe, what to think, what to
consider interesting, etc.
If it's an idea whose time has come, then I don't care who
it is that reports (conveys) it; and I don't care what his/her
opinions are. Well, OK, I might care to try to determine whether
the reporter is someone who'd be tempted to lie just to
score a point, but I mean, if we had some kind of "trust but
verify" possibility - which IMHO exists more today (with the
internet, and blogs, and ATMs and libraries... etc.)
than it did 10 or 20 generations ago - then I'd prefer
"just the facts").
Just my 0.02... from Mike Schwartz Glendale, AZ.
> "The first recorded talk by Richard Stallman on free software was in 1986, so..." umm, maybe that's right if you only count live gigs. However, I seem to recall that there was an interview of RMS in some (paper) magazine in 1985 - I think it was "Computer Language" magazine. Just my 0.02. - Mike Schwartz