[Sca-cooks] Redaction? (was: Looking for a period cheese filled pasta/lassagna dish served cold (long))

[Alex Clark]

At 03:27 AM 9/19/2003 -0400, Pani Jadwiga Zajaczkowa wrote:
>Well, as you said, "individual people taking more responsibility for the
>clarity of the language as they use it." Which to me means, you use the
>most clear term you can, consistently. And if enough people agree with
>you, they start using it too.

And to me that means that if you're going to use a term like buzzword you 
should figure out what it means.

>As for buzzwords-- I'm in a profession which has buzzwords we use
>internally (MARC, bibliographic instruction, SuDocs, metadata, AACR2) and
>which struggles continually to come up with ways to explain to the general
>public what we are doing in non-jargon terms. But we keep the jargon to
>use among us, because it improves the clarity of communication between
>members of the profession.

Duh. Of course you have jargon. That's because you have things to say for 
which there are no words that are exact, concise, and commonly used. What 
you're talking about now is real technical jargon, not fake technical 
jargon like "redact". As I have already pointed out, technical jargon is 
not identical to buzzwords. I wrote (on the 16th):

>This is true of some jargon, but the jargon that really is more precise 
>and useful is not necessarily what I would call buzzwords.

If you had anything meaningful to add to this discussion, why are you 
recycling an old point that I have already answered, without even 
addressing my answer? The in-group norm that you're defending is, as you 
must know, not entirely accepted even by established members of this group.

Alex Clark