[Default] On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 10:12:32 -0600, Alan
Giggled into the madness of usenet:

>On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 21:09:42 -0500, Ma¢k
> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 12:04:28 -0600, Alan Moorman >
>>Huffed and Puffed the following into the madness of usenet:
>>
>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I think you're confusing your being baffled with
>>>>meaninglessness in
>>>>>>general.
>>>>>
>>>>> OK, how about if I said that I think that 80% of the
>>>>people
>>>>> who would read that in this group wouldn't comprehend it,
>>>>> and would skip the information.
>>>>
>>>>Which group? This is going to 3 groups, most of the
>>>>participants are long term posters and post in all 3 groups
>>>>regularly. I am not saying some won't skip some of the
>>>>posts but a lot participate in these types of threads, some
>>>>ask for the "English" version from time to time. No big
>>>>deal.
>>>
>>>alt.food.diabetic,misc.health.diabetes,alt.supp ort.diabetes
>>>
>>>Are the groups. Sorry I didn't say "news groups".
>>>
>>>I read several diabetic groups and several food groups, and
>>>many of the posts are cross-posted, so I usually just say
>>>"news group" or "group". Jeez, I'm sorry.
>>>
>>>Regardless, posting in opaque scientific terminology is
>>>wasted effort unless one is in a professional group, perhaps
>>>one of the "sci." groups.
>>>
>>>Alan Moorman
>>
>>
>>if you don't like it, don't ask the original poster/s to dumb down
>>their posts. just skip over it or ask for clarification on the points
>>you do not understand.
>>
>>raise the bar, don't lower it. the last time we lowered the bar bush
>>stayed in office.
>
>
>And I didn't vote for him either time!!
>
>My only problem is this: If a person takes the time to
>learn about a specific sub-set of diabetes, and posts it in
>language that is virtually not comprehensible to most of the
>posters in the group, there is a big opportunity being
>missed.
>
>If I understood the information the OP researched, and felt
>it was worth posting, I would try to make it comprehensible
>to most of the general readers of the group -- just because
>they all might learn more from that.
>
>Posting in obtuse, scientific language just doesn't help
>people.
>
>Not gonna change my mind about that!
>
>Alan Moorman


quoting the original source is something that is asked for over and
over again. doing so at the beginning of a thread is not being
obtuse, using scientific language as you call it, is not being obtuse,
it is being exact, correct, in the use of terminology. Just because
you don't understand the language doesn't make it obtuse. asking
people to dumb it down is not necessary.

assuming as you do that no one can understand it is a separate issue.


--
Mck©® Deltec CoZmore Pumper
Type 1 since 1975
http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org
http://www.diabetic-talk.org
http://www.insulin-pumpers.org
http://www.pandora.com enter "Jason & Demarco"



"To announce that there must be no criticism of the
President, or that we are to stand by the President
right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile,
but is morally treasonable to the American public."
....Theodore Roosevelt

(o ô)
--ooO-(_)-Ooo--------------------

"I don't know half of you
half as well as I should like;
and I like less than half of you
half as well as you deserve."
....Bilbo Baggins


DISCLAIMER If you find a posting or message from me
offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it.
If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to
me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate...
..