| 1 |
Daniel Campbell posted on Tue, 16 Feb 2016 22:30:45 -0800 as excerpted: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> IMO you're over-thinking it. I read it as "As you were, then", which is |
| 4 |
> a common saying in the (American, at least) military advising one to |
| 5 |
> keep doing what they're doing, or return to a resting position. :) |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Yes. That's how I read it too... with the direct military reference in |
| 8 |
my head... but only _after_ realizing my first read simply didn't make |
| 9 |
sense in context. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
But I agree, that's almost certainly what was intended, which was why I |
| 12 |
decided there was a missing break, so that "As you were, then", could |
| 13 |
take on the military meaning, which in my (no-military-experience) mind |
| 14 |
at least, generally comes after a pause, represented by a break, in |
| 15 |
print. Without that, I saw it as continuation of the previous thought, |
| 16 |
with its connections with "dumb". |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
And knowing from hard experience how easy it is to type something that |
| 19 |
ends up being misread across continents and cultures, I thought it best |
| 20 |
to mention the missing break, tho in hindsight I also should have been |
| 21 |
explicit about the military reference of the positive interpretation, as |
| 22 |
well, as while I considered it obvious once the break was there, now that |
| 23 |
I think about it, it's equally likely (if not more so) to be missed, by |
| 24 |
anyone not particularly familiar with the cultural reference. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
So thanks for making the military reference explicit. I saw it on second |
| 27 |
read, but failed to make it explicit, thus inviting misinterpretation, |
| 28 |
myself. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 32 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
| 33 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |
Archives