--- In qalam@yahoogroups.com,
"seshattrismegistos <seshat@...>"
<seshat@...> wrote:

> Dear Etaonsh,
>
> > Without seeking to undermine

your

> > (quite total) authority here, I
> > didn't feel that, for the

record.

>
> A few examples of off-topic things

discussed recently: Is Noam

> Chomsky good or bad for the world?
>

Yes, OK. I think the 'bad' school
started that. My aim is to
demonstrate the relevance of some of
his main themes to alphabets. If the
'bad' school want to make the point
that Chomsky is not worthy of
discussion, it is kind of on-topic
but, I would argue, ill-considered,
flying in the face of recent media
interest in a man who is succeeding
in giving linguistics (and therefore
the kind of thing we discuss here) a
media profile, and, arguably, on the
level of the 'troll' jibe.

>

Is Etaonsh good or bad at quoting?

>

Agreed.

>
> Is "trolling" good or bad to say

to people?

>

Well I could have complained
privately to you but that would have
put you in the unenviable position
of putting a whole culture (U.S. Net
slang) on trial sub rosa.

>

Are Celtic symbols good

> or bad for nazis?
>

I think it was vice versa, and there
will undoubtedly be a relevant
problem discussing Gaulish glyphs if
some people can't look at Gaulish
'theta' without thinking of that
symbolism. Can we not, and should we
not, raise the wider issue of
symbolism and connotation if it
affects the very letters we might
want to discuss? Perhaps we should
issue disclaimers, e.g.,: 'I don't
like the Right, but I sure prefer
writing a Gaulish theta to 'th'
every time.

>
> > Racism is [...]
>
> Racism is off-topic.
>

Unless you are a Gaulish Druid being
told by a Roman soldier that your
way of writing 'th' is
inferior/unacceptable/outdated/polit
ically incorrect, or some comparable
circumstance (and let's face it,
this happens a lot in alphabetical
history).

>

Richard