Dear all,

On 04/05/2012 08:28 PM, John Hopkins wrote:
> Ei J.
>
>> I think if you stress this point, the majority of the list will agree
>> with you that "proper english" is not a requirement and actually,
>> considering bricolabs is mostly a "public south-to-south network", our
>> use of english as a common (public) language can be seen as a
>> colonialist leftover - or a kind favour to decadent western culture.
>
> Yes, the existence of a shared protocol within a social system
> (community, network) is a strange necessity that is demanding that we
> comply and yet provides the (only!) possible conduit for connection.
> This goes for English as it goes for IP (Internet Protocol) and for the
> metric system. All function similarly to control us and our expressive
> energies in specific ways, pathways. There is no connection without some
> kind of such protocol. Some are more flexible and forgiving than others
> that are rigid and very *unforgiving* while at the same time,
> flexibility carries the risk of mis-communication. This presents us
> always with a paradox.
>
> And, yes, perhaps I have a bit more restricted (but also deeper)
> understanding of English, as a native speaker. But having lived in
> second-language situations most of my adult life, when I am in such a
> situation, I always give respect to the fact when others are using 'my'
> protocol, as I hope is returned when I am using theirs.
>
> Whenever a new protocol is picked up to be used, the user should be
> aware that great damage may easily occur (in the communicative act) when
> the protocol is not used 'correctly.'

Speaking of protocols I've a soft spot for IETF and that suggest me to
quote what is also know as Postel's law:
"Be liberal in what you accept, and conservative in what you send."

> History is littered with the bloody results of such mis-understandings!
>
> If the Battles of Trafalgar and of Cape St Vincent had gone differently,
> indeed we would not be mostly speaking English on this list. Pero la
> vida es un camino extraño, eh?

Or maybe the Internet would not even exists, so this list, so this issue :)

>> But I believe what moves John to intervene here is mostly your
>> sarcasm, which can be easily perceived as offensive, especially for
>> all those here lacking context about you and western cynical humor in
>> general.
>
> yes, at least emoticons or something. my god, hard humor deployed f2f is
> one thing, and is a marvelous tool for subtle communication of emotive
> energies, but with the reduced and narrow possibilities of this medium,
> jep, keep yer shit 2gether!

I'm maybe too influenced by western culture, but it seemed evident to me
that Mr. Paw was referring to the average thought of those people not
keen on taking public transport, and his sentence should be intended as
an offense to them rather than to what such kind of people would
{in,}consciously label as "muslim scum".
I'm really prone to laugh on whatever, but I wouldn't be surprised if
someone would have found offensive the usage of an emoticon on such a
serious matter :)

> beautifully said:
>
>> You see: if you want to create an un/common ground of discussion among
>> very different people, minimalism is your friend.
>> So to say, keep your shit together. :^)
>
> jh

Said so, I hope that "keep your shit together" will be universally
recognized as Jaromil's law.

Best regards,
Pierpaolo