RE: acronyms

Date: Fri Sep 26 2003 - 17:11:57 EDT

  • Next message: George Murphy: "please stop"

    This is very interesting. Among the many hits for "ID", most of which are
    not qualified with a parenthetical statement, "Intelligent Design" is
    qualified as "(theology)".


                        "Gough, Joshua"
                        <> To:
                        Sent by: cc:
                        asa-owner@lists. Subject: RE: acronyms
                        09/26/03 03:55

    You can always visit and see if it's listed ;)

    Here are a few familiar ones:

    If not add it to it and make everyone's life easier
          -----Original Message-----
         From: Iain Strachan []
         Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 2:28 PM
         To: SHEILA WILSON; George Murphy; Jan de Koning
         Subject: Re: acronyms

         Might I suggest as a means to produced a better tempered debate, that
         if you don't know what an acronym means, that you reply **OFF-LIST**
         to the original sender asking her/him to explain what the acronyms
         mean. This means we don't get into tedious discussions about whether
         to use acronyms and whether to explain them, and the rest of us don't
         have to put up with emails from people asking about acronyms that many
         of us know already.

         I for one don't think it's reasonable that every time you use a TLA
         (Three Letter Acronym) that you have to explain it in brackets over
         the first use. Much better that people who don't know them politely
         ask the originator privately what they mean. That way everyone gets
         up to speed reasonably quickly.

         TTFN. (If you want an explanation of this one, email me privately).

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Sep 26 2003 - 17:17:53 EDT