From: Geoff Burling llywrch@agora.rdrop.com
On Sun, 10 Jul 2005, Rebecca wrote:
On 7/10/05, JAY JG jayjg@hotmail.com wrote:
If you imagine that your attempt to further your campaign against the
use of
BCE/CE using this backdoor method went unnoticed, rest assured that it
did
not.
Jay.
Thank you for pointing out what should've been obvious - it was easy to overlook. I agree entirely with what Jguk said about making things intelligible in a broader context. I did not, however, read between the lines, and *very strongly* condemn this attempt at continuing the BC-BCE war by the back door.
Well, I for one don't see how Jon's suggestion is continuing this dispute, even if it is his intent.
Asking editors to avoid an academic style & try to write in layman's terms does not logically lead to eschewing BCE/CE -- unless by the single act of taking a paper & replacing every instance of AD/BC with CE/BCE instantly makes it worthy of publication in an academic journal.
He has used that argument many times to justify removal of BCE/CE; now that it has been exposed, it will be more difficult to do so.
In fact, about the only person who keeps reintroducing this BCE/CE matter is Jay himself -- & I've invited him in the past to take it off list. I do so again; he seems to be causing trouble to make a point.
Interesting opinion. Thanks for sharing.
Jay.