On May 3, 2006, at 1:47 PM, charles matthews wrote:
wants to join that community, they have to learn the
jargon. Even the most welcoming communities work this way.
No they don't. You're describing rude, myopic communities with
interest in outreach. Not a global voluntary organisation.
Only rude, myopic communities have their own jargon?
Not at all. Medical doctors have jargon, for example. But only
people actually do expect what you say, that is, to join the
must immerse yourself in the jargon. The analogy here is not with
a doctor, but in taking part in a discussion with one
Exactly. People who become Wikipedians should learn the jargon, and
it's quite clear that at AfD, the opinions of *wikipedians* are the
opinions that matter. Not the opinions of every anonymous contributor
who comes in a vain ballot-stuffing attempt.
The purpose of
jargon is to make communication easier within a group.
Everyone here knows what "cruft" is.
Actually, the thread demonstrates the precise opposite: it is used
who have really no idea of its denotation and connotations.
The explication I read at [[Cruft]] and at the Jargon File's entry
for "cruft" fit well within what I understood the meaning of "cruft"
to be on Wikipedia.
contexts, it's extraneous
content not suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia.
Well, the actual usage is as a pejorative-type suffix; what you are
smuggling there into 'extraneous'.
That's not what I'm smuggling there, that's what the word means, and
that's what I and many others have always understood it to mean. The
fact that large numbers of people don't know that only reiterates my
point that we should educate Wikipedians about the jargon.
"Listcruft" is cruft in the form of a list. "Fancruft" is cruft of
interest only to fans of the topic in question.
willing to explain that to newbies. And anyone who's
offended by the
word "cruft" needs to grow a thicker skin, because once we start
making up euphemisms for it, we'll end up with even more impenetrable
jargon than we have now.
As I say, myopic rude jargon-using people miss the point of the
mission; which is not to send people away seething. Hacker
Once again: you deride "myopic rude jargon-using people" for their
incivility, not realizing that calling people "myopic" and "rude"
just because they use technical jargon is in itself uncivil.
Philip L. Welch