Grammer (was Re: virtual OS / a proposal regarding one of the principles))

[Davis, Megan]

All,

Grammar. I am in stitches over this conversation.

And my two cents: for those whose two feet are not their means of personal
transportation, the more inclusive word "mobility" Chris sent out seems an
improvement. Although I admit the idea is so much more pungent in Harrison's
original words. So the Law of Mobility becomes a way to acknowledge
diversity, not a way to split hairs. Or raise them.

Two more cents: the German penchant for splitting verbs (as opposed to
hairs, I suppose) may help them hold many ideas in mind at once. Just to
survive daily conversations! I salute their ability to concentrate. Perhaps
this is another good example of expanding our Now...

Megan Davis
Organizational Development Consultant, WSDOT OD Services
(360) 705-7412
FAX: (360) 705-6803
davisme at wsdot.wa.gov


> ----------
> From:         Chris Corrigan[SMTP:corcom at interchange.ubc.ca]
> Sent:         Wednesday, March 29, 2000 4:58 PM
> To:   OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
> Subject:      Grammer (was Re: virtual OS / a proposal regarding one of
> the principles))
>
> The grammer of the principles is most interesting.  For example, "whoever
> comes is the right people." should be either "whoever comes are the right
> people" or "whoever comes is the right person," according to that sublime
> authority, the Microsoft Word 98 Grammer Checker.
>
> I think that so far, the only accepted change to the principles (as
> decreed by the International OS Committee Responsible for Reviewing
> Grammer and Other Oversights) is changing the law of two feet to the law
> of mobility.  The Hair Spliiting and Raising Subcommittee is somewhat
> wedded to the status quo, but had to accept this change after realizing
> that whereas two feet were useful things to have, they didn't mean squat
> until you allowed them to move you.
>
> I understand that they're currently reviewing a proposal to clarify
> exactly why the people who sit at the bar are called butterflies and not
> barflies.
>
>
> CJC
>
> Harrison Owen wrote:
>
>       At 02:53 PM 3/29/00 +0000, you wrote:>"What happens is the only
> thing that happens.">I'm with you.>That "only thing that could have" has
> stuck in my conscience like a fishbone>for more than a year.>>-Chris
> Weaver*******************************I love to split hairs. And being
> grammatically correct is not one of my virtues. (Politically correct
> neither) So. If it didn't happen -- it couldn't happen -- just then.
> Sometime later -- maybe. In the past -- possibly. But right then it
> didn't, and therefore couldn't. Not possible. You want it a different way?
> Sounds fine to me. Especially when you get it into German. Any people who
> split a verb between the front and back of a long sentence which should
> have been a paragraph -- making it impossible to decipher for folks who
> usually keep their verbs all in one place -- can certainly have it any way
> they want. If for no other reason, I for one will never figure it out. So
> carry on. Seriously, the words really aren't all that important -- Opening
> space is.Harrison
>
>       Harrison Owen
>       7808 River Falls Drive
>       Potomac, MD 20854
>       USA
>       phone 301-469-9269
>       fax 301-983-9314
>       website
>       www.mindspring.com/~owenhh
>       Open Space Institute websites
>       www.openspaceworld.org
>
> --
> CHRIS CORRIGAN
> 108-1035 Pacific Street
> Vancouver BC
> V6E 4G7
>
> Phone: 604.683.3080
> Fax: 604.683-3036
>
>
>