Re: spelling correction

[Christopher Faylor <cgf-no-personal-reply-please at cygwin dot com>]

On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 02:45:00PM +0100, Phil Betts wrote:
>Alexander Gottwald wrote:
>>On Thu, 30 Sep 2004, Thomas Munro wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> On this page:
>>> 
>>> http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/cygwin-x-faq.html
>>> 
>>> there is a heading:
>>> 
>>> "11.4. Whom holds the copyright on the Cygwin/X source code?"
>>> 
>>> It should of course be "Who".
>>> 
>>> Sorry to send such trivial feedback to this list but your index
>>> page give this address for such problems!
>>
>>http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-xfree/2002-01/msg00166.html
>
>The links referred to in Harold's message only serve to prove him
>wrong.  Yes, even the great can occasionally have an off day ;-)
>
>I only mention this because the vehemence of Harold's rebuttal is
>likely to persuade others that he is correct, and it wouldn't do to
>perpetuate the confusion.

There is a problem with being a language lawyer on the internet.

vehemence
	1.  The quality pr state of being vehement; impetuous force;
	impetuosity; violence; fury; as, the vehemence.

	2.  Violent ardor; great heat; animated fervor; as, the vehemence of
	love, anger, or other passions.

rebuttal
	n 1: the speech act of refuting by offering a contrary contention or
	argument

	2: (law) a pleading by the defendant in reply to a plaintiff's
	surrejoinder [syn: rebutter]

I saw no vehemence in his response and it wasn't a rebuttal.  Harold was
willing to make the changes -- he just had some additional rules for so
doing.

This was, most likely, a representation of exasperation at people
expecting him to spend time with fixes for grammatical problems while
contributing nothing else of value.

I won't say that I agree or disagree with his position but he surely had
the right to choose to spend his time as he wanted and to set rules for
updating documentation.

>Picks up soapbox and walks off into the sunset...

cgf