[bksvol-discuss] Re: I have a question please and thank you.

  • From: Rogerbailey81@xxxxxxx
  • To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2009 19:32:11 EDT

Well, Kim, as an atheist who has often used the word god in some of my 
oaths I will have to agree with you that it is a bit amusing. The explanation 
is 
that when I use such a word or phrase I am not really thinking in terms of 
swearing an oath as is apparently the case when anyone else does it whether 
they are a believer or not. It is, rather, an expletive. It is an expletive 
that I have heard others utter all my life with no thought to literal 
meanings, that is, no thought to literal meanings by either myself or the 
utterers. I have just picked up those expletives along with everyone else. If I 
give 
my words some thought and reflection I will avoid such religious 
references. However, by the very nature of an expletive, the situations in 
which 
expletives are usually uttered are not very conducive to thoughtful reflection.

                                                                          
"The end may justify the means as long as there is something that justifies 
the end. 
" Leon Trotsky     

                 The Militant: http://www.themilitant.com Pathfinder Press: 
http://www.pathfinderpress.com
Granma International: http://granma.cu/ingles/index.html
                 _

table with 2 columns and 6 rows
Subj: 
[bksvol-discuss] Re: I have a question please and thank you.   
Date: 
9/9/2009 3:36:52 AM Eastern Daylight Time  
From: 
kimfri11@xxxxxxxxxxx  
Reply-to: 
bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx  
To: 
bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx  
Sent from the Internet 
(Details) 
table end

Hi, Roger, I tend not to like that particular word myself,  but it was used 
in common English speech in the 17th century and in fact, if you come 
across
the King James Version of the Bible, that word you used occurs throughout 1 
and 2 Kings and 1 and 2 Chronicles. I know what you are getting at and I 
think
cultures differ on what they might consider obscene. I think what have been 
considered oaths have changed. At some time if you said "God's body", that
would have been considered an oath. You are right in that people will say 
what they say. Personally, I wouldn't swear by asking God to damn somebody or
use the name of Jesus if I was particularly upset. I find it kind of 
amusing when I hear of people who are atheists swearing and using God's name in 
their oaths.
I think to myself: "Now here are these supposed atheists who will tell me 
that believing in God is irrational because to their minds their is no such 
thing,
and yet, they will swear by something they claim not to believe in. If they 
really are atheists, why can't they come up with oaths that are at least 
consistent
with their non-beliefs?" God knows, I don't claim to be consistent myself, 
so I guess I'll have to cut you some slack here, right? However, I think if
you mean what you say and don't believe in God at all, I say, try to think 
of something you can swear by, if you must swear by something, that is 
consistent
with your beliefs or lack thereof. Regards, Kim.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rogerbailey81@xxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2009 8:49 PM
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: I have a question please and thank you.

Some time ago I recall Pavi saying that the dictionary that algorithm uses 
was reviewed and that it was laughable when they saw some of the words that
were in it. Supposedly that was corrected, but I very much suspect that I 
would still consider it laughable. Honestly, I was once telling someone 
something
another person said. I mentioned that the person had said that another 
person was pissed off. I do not ordinarily use that phrase myself, but since I 
was
relating what someone else said I did that time. I was angrily accused of 
being obscene. It never even occurred to me in my wildest speculations that 
anyone
would consider that to be obscene and if I had found it in that dictionary 
of prohibited words and phrases I would have found that laughable. 
Nevertheless,
someone did consider it obscene. That is why I tend to think that the 
person who is offended by so-called "adult" words has the problem, not the one 
who
utters them.

                                                                 "The end 
may justify the means as long as there is something that justifies the end. 
" Leon Trotsky     

             The Militant: 
http://www.themilitant.com 
Pathfinder Press: 
http://www.pathfinderpress.com
Granma International: 
http://granma.cu/ingles/index.html
             _

table with 2 columns and 6 rows
Subj: 
[bksvol-discuss] Re: I have a question please and thank you.   
Date: 
9/8/2009 10:48:03 PM Eastern Daylight Time  
From: 
cherryjam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  
Reply-to: 
bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx  
To: 
bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx  
Sent from the Internet 
(Details) 
table end

Evan, I've wondered about how that algorithm works too, because 
of the children's books I've proofed that were erroneously marked 
as adult by the algorithm.  I'd bet part of it is based on 
Bookshare useing a dictionary of words that can be considered 
adult (with some contexting built in, I'd guess).  The final 
designation of adult comes about by using a weighting of the 
number of times words/terms/phrases appear factored against the 
total number of words in a book.  So if you have a children's 
book with very few words, and one of the 'suspect' words appears, 
although it could be in a totally innocent context, bam! The 
children's book is going to get rated as adult.  I had that 
happen a few months ago with a board book I was proofreading!

Just guessing here, of course. smile.

Judy s.

EVAN REESE wrote:
> What determines adult content is ultimately the proofreader. Bookshare's 
> computer can mark a book either Adult or not, using some secret 
> algorithm that staff refuses to divulge to us, but the proofreader can 
> change the Bookshare computer's choice if he/she feels that a change is 
> justified. It used to be either the submitter and/or the proofreader, 
> but Bookshare took that choice away from submitters and seems to have no 
> inclination to give it back.

To unsubscribe from this list send a blank Email to
bksvol-discuss-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
put the word 'unsubscribe' by itself in the subject line.  To get a list of 
available commands, put the word 'help' by itself in the subject line.

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus 
signature database 4408 (20090908) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

Other related posts: