The question wasn’t how old the design of the letter is, but the use of “story” to describe it.
Does it matter. You are wrong. That’s all there is to say.
If you want to go ahead and prove it, make my day. Happily eat humble pie.
Best of luck have a nice weekend.
Okaaaay. 
Yeah, no. Opinions are by definition ‘subjective‘ statements. For example: Of course you can tell us you don’t ‘like’ certain terms and I am happy to respect that, because in this case you wouldn’t be making an objective claim (that is possibly right or wrong). You would just tell us about your preferences. Nothing wrong with that.
But you didn’t just ‘voice an opinion’. You argued and arguments can be objectively flawed (e.g. by containing logical fallacies) and premises of arguments can be objective wrong. And you made statements about what is correct and incorrect, which falls in the category of factual, testable claims about reality. It is about what IS, not about subjective views. And you mocked and dismissed something just because you weren’t familiar with it – in a way that is (in my opinion) totally inacceptable and I call that out. Let me be more blunt, since my earlier comment clearly didn’t get through: your comments were dishonest, ignorant and arrogant.
Ignorant, because you didn’t even care whether there could be any potential reasons for other terms. An open person would be curious, even eager, to learn about potential reasons and ask questions. That’s what forums are all about. To learn from others. The ignorant approach is to just dismiss something instantly without even wanting to hear what other could potentially say.
It’s also extremely arrogant, since you make yourself the judge of which terms are supposedly correct and incorrent—for an entire field! Other “experts” use those terms and you called that “even worse”, again expressly putting yourself above everyone as the ultimate judge.
It’s dishonest, because you argued with this fake scenario of someone misspeaking at a conference and everyone just picking it up because the speakers are supposedly the “experts”. Can you demonstrate that these alternative terms all came into existence this way? No, of course not! So why use that scenario as part of your argument? It’s easy to understand: It’s a dishonest attempt to manipulate the discussion. It’s to give the impression, that whatever caused the existence of terms you don’t like must be illegitimate like this “accident” in your fake scenario. Not to mention that this scenario mocks all the people involved. It mocks the listed “experts”, which supposedly aren’t able to use the “proper” terminology – again ignoring and dismissing they could have good reason to say what they say. And it mocks the fictional audience, which supposedly is too dumb to think for themselves, so they just parrot whatever is said on stage.
So, to sum up: no, nothing you said is as “valid” as what I said. I try to argue honestly and reasonably and with demonstrable facts about reality (e.g. how language works and changes). You make up whatever reason could potentially be used to justify your position – even if it is dishonest. ‘It’s all just a matter of opinion’ is not true. That idea is an excuse. But no one falls for it. It doesn’t help to cover the flaws in what you said. It doesn’t help to dismiss what I said. It’s almost funny that pointing to supposed opinions is only ever used by the people who use flawed arguments and questionable or false statements. No one with facts or valid and sound arguments on his side would ever claim that the points of discussion are a matter of opinion. It would be a totally unnecessary step down. Pointing to opinions is only ever used to justify bad arguments.
And finally, I am sick and tired of people dragging my user name into discussions. It’s just a project label. A playful use of the connotations of “guru”. Again, everyone can have their opinion and no one needs to like that label. But DO NOT MAKE IT PART OF AN ARGUMENT. It’s dishonest. Stop it. It’s the classic ad hominem attack, where someone tries to dismiss an argument or cause distraction by addressing something about a person instead of focussing on what was actually said by that person. In a discussion, my user name is irrelevant. Just as my place of birth, color of skin, sex, sexual orientation and so on. Adress what is being said, not who said it and what you may or may not like about that person. And maybe rethink your own arguments. If you need ad hominem attacks, maybe your own arguments simply aren’t good enough.
1 Like
You can have an opinion but not your own facts
I’m starting a game …
Every time someone says ‘‘binocular’’, I’m taking a shot
I’m IN!!!
1 Like