File /Humanist.vol22.txt, message 278


Date:         Wed, 22 Oct 2008 07:21:34 +0100
From: Humanist Discussion Group <willard.mccarty-AT-MCCARTY.ORG.UK>
Subject: 22.289 why no signature
To: humanist-AT-Princeton.EDU


               Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 22, No. 289.
       Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London
                        www.princeton.edu/humanist/
                     Submit to: humanist-AT-princeton.edu



         Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 07:15:35 +0100
         From: Humanist Discussion Group <willard.mccarty-AT-mccarty.org.uk>
         Subject: Re: 22.286 why no signature? multiple languages

Dear Stephen, Michael and Willard,

The main reason why I choose not to use one formal signature attached to
my emails is simple: I do emails in so many different languages, to so
many different people, that it would be sort of a hassle to do multiple
translations of it. It would look very weird to write an email in French
to a friend in Paris, and have a signature in English attached at the
bottom, being a Brazilian, you see? Also, having such a signature in
multiple languages would look awkward. That is why I do not have a
standard signature attached to the bottom of every email  I send. It
does not work for me. I speak and interact in Portuguese, Spanish,
French and Italian.

So Im sorry if I never provided information on my background. There is
a short video available on you tube <http://www.pucsp.br/> in which you
can see an overview of the digital inclusion NGO I helped create here in
Brazil and of which Im the current Knowledge Coordinator;
Eletrocooperativa. An English translation of the institutional website
of the Catholic University of Sao Paulo (PUC SP), where I am currently a
first year PhD student, is not available, unfortunately. Its only
available in Portuguese.

Regards,

Renata Lemos

Knowledge Coordinator, Eletrocooperativa Institute, Brazil.
http://www.eletrocooperativa.art.br

Researcher, Post-Graduate Program in Communications and Semiotics, PUC
SP, Brazil.
http://www.pucsp.br/pos/cos/


2008/10/21 Humanist Discussion Group <willard.mccarty-AT-mccarty.org.uk
<mailto:willard.mccarty-AT-mccarty.org.uk>>

                  Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 22, No. 286.
          Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London
                           www.princeton.edu/humanist/
     <http://www.princeton.edu/humanist/>
                        Submit to: humanist-AT-princeton.edu
     <mailto:humanist-AT-princeton.edu>

      [
     --[1]------------------------------------------------------------------
            Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 06:25:16 +0100
            From: Humanist Discussion Group
     <willard.mccarty-AT-mccarty.org.uk 
<mailto:willard.mccarty-AT-mccarty.org.uk>>
                       In-Reply-To: <48F99341.6090000-AT-mccarty.org.uk
     <mailto:48F99341.6090000-AT-mccarty.org.uk>>

     I too rather dislike the sort of columnar signatures that function as
     potted biographies, but I also regret that under the present Humanist
     system it is often very difficult to identify or locate the authors of
     successive posts, since they all come as if from Willard himself. This
     sometimes requires recourse to Google (all the more difficult if the
     author is John Smith or Mary McCarthy or ....) when one wishes to
     respond off list to some query or suggestion.

     It's good to know who is talking, and good to know where they are
     talking from.

     Stephen Clark
     Professor of Philosophy
     University of Liverpool
     http://pcwww.liv.ac.uk/~srlclark/srlc.htm
     <http://pcwww.liv.ac.uk/%7Esrlclark/srlc.htm>
     <http://pcwww.liv.ac.uk/%7Esrlclark/srlc.htm>






     --[2]------------------------------------------------------------------
            Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 06:25:57 +0100
            From: Humanist Discussion Group
     <willard.mccarty-AT-mccarty.org.uk 
<mailto:willard.mccarty-AT-mccarty.org.uk>>
            Subject: Re: 22.281 why signatures, why brevity in them
            In-Reply-To: <48F99341.6090000-AT-mccarty.org.uk
     <mailto:48F99341.6090000-AT-mccarty.org.uk>>



     Sometimes I hate it when I have to argue both sides of a point.

     My own personal preferences would be that I should NOT address,
     as below, anyone differently if HE were a SHE, or if Chinese or
     Aleut, etc., etc., etc.

     However, in my recent personal experience, I may have cost some
     person his or her job simply by offering to proofread web pages
     written by that person's now apparent superior, but of whom I'd
     not heard previously.  This possibily could have been avoided--
     if I had previously know enough about the nationalities, in the
     detail required, to have foreseen such events and thus NOT have
     tried to do someone a favor who would like resent it.

     Oh well. . .love and learn,


     Thanks!!!


     Michael S. Hart
     Founder
     Project Gutenberg

     Recommended Books:

     Dandelion Wine, by Ray Bradbury:  For The Right Brain
     Atlas Shrugged, by Ayn Rand:  For The Left Brain [or both]
     Diamond Age, by Neal Stephenson:  To Understand The Internet
     The Phantom Toobooth, by Norton Juster:  Lesson of Life. . .





     --[3]------------------------------------------------------------------
            Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 06:35:14 +0100
            From: Humanist Discussion Group
     <willard.mccarty-AT-mccarty.org.uk 
<mailto:willard.mccarty-AT-mccarty.org.uk>>
            Subject: present Humanist & most desirable practice
            In-Reply-To: <48F99341.6090000-AT-mccarty.org.uk
     <mailto:48F99341.6090000-AT-mccarty.org.uk>>

     Those here will be relieved when finally the new Humanist is up and
     running, which should be within days now. Then the current 
truncation of
     identities, which I only sometimes catch, will cease. Sorry it has 
taken
     so long, but the crafting of good software takes time.

     I would think that the ideal practice in signatures would come from a
     balance of considerations -- of the reader who is not at all interested
     in your message or you and so wants to scroll past as quickly as
     possible, and of the reader who is. But that latter reader, unless in
     pursuit of you for reasons other than those consistent with the 
purposes
     of Humanist, would, I'd think, be best served by a minimal amount of
     information sufficient to find out who you are and how to get in touch.
     I'd ask, what does a potted biography say about the person?

     Yours,
     WM


   

Humanist Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005