On Saturday, July 16, 2022 at 1:07:42 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> * Peter T. Daniels:
>
> > On Saturday, July 16, 2022 at 9:23:51 AM UTC-4, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >> On Friday, July 15, 2022 at 6:18:09 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> >>> * Peter T. Daniels:
> >>> > On Friday, July 15, 2022 at 12:13:22 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> >>> >> * Peter T. Daniels:
> >>> >>> On Friday, July 15, 2022 at 9:04:46 AM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:

> >>> >>>> Your government is never concerned with the free exercise of religion?
> >>> >>> Of course not. Congress and (after the XIVth Amendment) the States
> >>> >>> are prohibited from interfering.
> >>> >> I see. It would be strictly a matter of the courts then. They deal with
> >>> >> such requests constantly.
> >>> >> So for a parallel to the German law in question, I'd expect a SCOTUS
> >>> >> decision. But I have the feeling that the rights of children to decide
> >>> >> for themselves aren't high priority in the US.
> >>> > Define "child."
> >>> Minor, whatever.
> > "Minor" is a legal term, "child" isn't.
>
> That would depend on the jurisdiction.
>
> The Convention on the Rights of the Child covers people under 18, so I
> guess they thought "child" was the word that travels best. Well, every
> member of the UN except the US has ratified it.

In what variety of English is a late-teenager a "child"? That works
in Italian, where a "ragazzo": is up to 25 or so.

English-speakers would expect a Convention on the Rights of the
Child to protect pre-teens, adolescents at the eldest.

> >>> Take medical consent. In Quebec, the age is 14. So, at least in
> >>> principle, a 14-year-old can get prescription contraceptives or even an
> >>> abortion, and the doctors can't tell the parents about it.
> >>> My impression is that in most of the US, a minor living with or
> >>> financially dependent on the parents can't make such decisions.
> >
> > Do you know about "emancipated minor"?
> >
> >>> A judge in Alabama, of all places, and a Trump appointee no less,
> >>> decided that outlawing gender-affirming care is an unwarranted
> >>> interference with parental decisions. Never mind the right of the minor
> >>> to get the best medical care, it's the parents who get protection for
> >>> their decisions good or bad.
> > Obviously not, as shown by this case. The same judge would
> > presumably rule in favor of a minor who (knew they) needed
> > "gender-affirming care" (whatever that is), regardless of "parental
> > decisions."
>
> Can a minor be emancipated and live with the parents?

That's the point! Presumably they wouldn't want to.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emancipation_of_minors

I don't like it that the first things google showed me were ads
from NJ and NY lawyers handling emancipation.

On 17/07/22 03:53, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> In what variety of English is a late-teenager a "child"? That works
> in Italian, where a "ragazzo": is up to 25 or so.

Topic drift: WIWAL, the Australian children of Italian immigrants used
the word "bimbo" to describe a girl. Never a boy.

That's weird, when you think of it. Italian inflects for gender, and has
a clear distinction between "bimbo" (male) and "bimba" (female). But it
took only one generation for that part of the language to be lost.

--
Peter Moylan Newcastle, NSW http://www.pmoylan.org

On 7/16/2022 8:17 PM, Peter Moylan wrote:
> Peter T. Daniels wrote:

>> In what variety of English is a late-teenager a "child"? That
>> works in Italian, where a "ragazzo": is up to 25 or so.

> Topic drift: WIWAL, the Australian children of Italian immigrants
> used the word "bimbo" to describe a girl. Never a boy.

> That's weird, when you think of it. Italian inflects for gender, and
> has a clear distinction between "bimbo" (male) and "bimba" (female).
> But it took only one generation for that part of the language to be
> lost.

It appears that the masculine form is used when an undifferentiated
"child" is meant.

https://www.wordreference.com/iten/bimbo

On 7/16/2022 12:29 PM, Quinn C wrote:
> * CDB:

[Unstern redux]

>> There's "consternated".

>> https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/consternated
>
>> Maybe not the best style.

> When I see "const**ated", my thoughts might get a little stuck.

St*p, you're straining my asterisk.

On Saturday, July 16, 2022 at 8:17:35 PM UTC-4, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 17/07/22 03:53, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> > In what variety of English is a late-teenager a "child"? That works
> > in Italian, where a "ragazzo": is up to 25 or so.
>
> Topic drift: WIWAL, the Australian children of Italian immigrants used
> the word "bimbo" to describe a girl. Never a boy.

But that's AmE as well! "Bimbo" is an insult for a bodacious
blonde with no brain -- the very stereotype (e.g. Pamela Anderson
of *Baywatch*) that Loni Anderson's (no relation) character on
*WKRP in Cincinnati* was designed to challenge. (If there was
once an Italian connection, it's not part of the mythology.)

"Bimbo" can also be used for the male equivalent, such as the guys
who are seen, apparently, on *The Bachelorette*. (I gather there are
local versions of that franchise all over the world.) Which has in turn
given rise to the occasional "bimbette."

(Speaking of "bodacious," the previous thread got it backwards.
What was wondered was not whether "bodacious" could be used
on its own, but whether "tatas" could mean 'big boobs' without
"bodacious" attached to it.)

> That's weird, when you think of it. Italian inflects for gender, and has
> a clear distinction between "bimbo" (male) and "bimba" (female). But it
> took only one generation for that part of the language to be lost.

A historical sociolinguist might note that the dominant dialect of the
speech community, i.e. English, doesn't use grammatical gender that
way, so in the imperfectly learned heritage language, it turned out to
be expendable.

* Peter T. Daniels:

> On Saturday, July 16, 2022 at 8:17:35 PM UTC-4, Peter Moylan wrote:
>> On 17/07/22 03:53, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>
>>> In what variety of English is a late-teenager a "child"? That works
>>> in Italian, where a "ragazzo": is up to 25 or so.
>>
>> Topic drift: WIWAL, the Australian children of Italian immigrants used
>> the word "bimbo" to describe a girl. Never a boy.
>
> But that's AmE as well! "Bimbo" is an insult for a bodacious
> blonde with no brain -- the very stereotype (e.g. Pamela Anderson
> of *Baywatch*) that Loni Anderson's (no relation) character on
> *WKRP in Cincinnati* was designed to challenge. (If there was
> once an Italian connection, it's not part of the mythology.)
>
> "Bimbo" can also be used for the male equivalent, such as the guys
> who are seen, apparently, on *The Bachelorette*. (I gather there are
> local versions of that franchise all over the world.) Which has in turn
> given rise to the occasional "bimbette."

In my experience, the male version has switched over to being "himbo".

--
Quinn C
My pronouns are they/them
(or other gender-neutral ones)

* Peter T. Daniels:

> On Saturday, July 16, 2022 at 1:07:42 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
>> * Peter T. Daniels:
>>
>>> On Saturday, July 16, 2022 at 9:23:51 AM UTC-4, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>>> On Friday, July 15, 2022 at 6:18:09 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
>>>>> * Peter T. Daniels:
>>>>> > On Friday, July 15, 2022 at 12:13:22 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
>>>>> >> * Peter T. Daniels:
>>>>> >>> On Friday, July 15, 2022 at 9:04:46 AM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
>
>>>>> >>>> Your government is never concerned with the free exercise of religion?
>>>>> >>> Of course not. Congress and (after the XIVth Amendment) the States
>>>>> >>> are prohibited from interfering.
>>>>> >> I see. It would be strictly a matter of the courts then. They deal with
>>>>> >> such requests constantly.
>>>>> >> So for a parallel to the German law in question, I'd expect a SCOTUS
>>>>> >> decision. But I have the feeling that the rights of children to decide
>>>>> >> for themselves aren't high priority in the US.
>>>>> > Define "child."
>>>>> Minor, whatever.
>>> "Minor" is a legal term, "child" isn't.
>>
>> That would depend on the jurisdiction.
>>
>> The Convention on the Rights of the Child covers people under 18, so I
>> guess they thought "child" was the word that travels best. Well, every
>> member of the UN except the US has ratified it.
>
> In what variety of English is a late-teenager a "child"? That works
> in Italian, where a "ragazzo": is up to 25 or so.
>
> English-speakers would expect a Convention on the Rights of the
> Child to protect pre-teens, adolescents at the eldest.
>
>>>>> Take medical consent. In Quebec, the age is 14. So, at least in
>>>>> principle, a 14-year-old can get prescription contraceptives or even an
>>>>> abortion, and the doctors can't tell the parents about it.
>>>>> My impression is that in most of the US, a minor living with or
>>>>> financially dependent on the parents can't make such decisions.
>>>
>>> Do you know about "emancipated minor"?
>>>
>>>>> A judge in Alabama, of all places, and a Trump appointee no less,
>>>>> decided that outlawing gender-affirming care is an unwarranted
>>>>> interference with parental decisions. Never mind the right of the minor
>>>>> to get the best medical care, it's the parents who get protection for
>>>>> their decisions good or bad.
>>> Obviously not, as shown by this case. The same judge would
>>> presumably rule in favor of a minor who (knew they) needed
>>> "gender-affirming care" (whatever that is), regardless of "parental
>>> decisions."
>>
>> Can a minor be emancipated and live with the parents?
>
> That's the point! Presumably they wouldn't want to.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emancipation_of_minors

Which makes it a vastly bigger effort and not really comparable. Do
those emancipated minors get housing from the state?

--
Quinn C
My pronouns are they/them
(or other gender-neutral ones)

I thought some AUErs might find this Fesshole amusing:

I write the horoscopes for a popular publication. If anyone asks, I
tell them charting likely outcomes is really complex and time
consuming. That's bollocks; I make it all up.

<https://twitter.com/fesshole/status/1549475419262488576>

--
They do (play, that is), and nobody gets killed, but Metallic K.O. is
the only rock album I know where you can actually hear hurled beer
bottles breaking against guitar strings. ---Lester Bangs

On 20/07/2022 8:14 am, Adam Funk wrote:
> I thought some AUErs might find this Fesshole amusing:
>
> I write the horoscopes for a popular publication. If anyone asks, I
> tell them charting likely outcomes is really complex and time
> consuming. That's bollocks; I make it all up.
>
> <https://twitter.com/fesshole/status/1549475419262488576>

I enjoyed Barry Potts's reply: "Always thought it was bullshit.
But then again I am a Sagittarius and we're quite sceptical."

--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within

On 2022-07-20, Richard Heathfield wrote:

> On 20/07/2022 8:14 am, Adam Funk wrote:
>> I thought some AUErs might find this Fesshole amusing:
>>
>> I write the horoscopes for a popular publication. If anyone asks, I
>> tell them charting likely outcomes is really complex and time
>> consuming. That's bollocks; I make it all up.
>>
>> <https://twitter.com/fesshole/status/1549475419262488576>
>
> I enjoyed Barry Potts's reply: "Always thought it was bullshit.
> But then again I am a Sagittarius and we're quite sceptical."

I think it's an old joke but it's a good one.

--
If you wear a warmer sporran
you can keep the foe at bay

On Tuesday, July 19, 2022 at 9:54:28 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> * Peter T. Daniels:
> > On Saturday, July 16, 2022 at 1:07:42 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> >> * Peter T. Daniels:
> >>> On Saturday, July 16, 2022 at 9:23:51 AM UTC-4, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>>> On Friday, July 15, 2022 at 6:18:09 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> >>>>> * Peter T. Daniels:
> >>>>> > On Friday, July 15, 2022 at 12:13:22 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> >>>>> >> * Peter T. Daniels:
> >>>>> >>> On Friday, July 15, 2022 at 9:04:46 AM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> >>>>> >>>> Your government is never concerned with the free exercise of religion?
> >>>>> >>> Of course not. Congress and (after the XIVth Amendment) the States
> >>>>> >>> are prohibited from interfering.
> >>>>> >> I see. It would be strictly a matter of the courts then. They deal with
> >>>>> >> such requests constantly.
> >>>>> >> So for a parallel to the German law in question, I'd expect a SCOTUS
> >>>>> >> decision. But I have the feeling that the rights of children to decide
> >>>>> >> for themselves aren't high priority in the US.
> >>>>> > Define "child."
> >>>>> Minor, whatever.
> >>> "Minor" is a legal term, "child" isn't.
> >> That would depend on the jurisdiction.
> >> The Convention on the Rights of the Child covers people under 18, so I
> >> guess they thought "child" was the word that travels best. Well, every
> >> member of the UN except the US has ratified it.
> > In what variety of English is a late-teenager a "child"? That works
> > in Italian, where a "ragazzo": is up to 25 or so.
> > English-speakers would expect a Convention on the Rights of the
> > Child to protect pre-teens, adolescents at the eldest.
> >>>>> Take medical consent. In Quebec, the age is 14. So, at least in
> >>>>> principle, a 14-year-old can get prescription contraceptives or even an
> >>>>> abortion, and the doctors can't tell the parents about it.
> >>>>> My impression is that in most of the US, a minor living with or
> >>>>> financially dependent on the parents can't make such decisions.
> >>> Do you know about "emancipated minor"?
> >>>>> A judge in Alabama, of all places, and a Trump appointee no less,
> >>>>> decided that outlawing gender-affirming care is an unwarranted
> >>>>> interference with parental decisions. Never mind the right of the minor
> >>>>> to get the best medical care, it's the parents who get protection for
> >>>>> their decisions good or bad.
> >>> Obviously not, as shown by this case. The same judge would
> >>> presumably rule in favor of a minor who (knew they) needed
> >>> "gender-affirming care" (whatever that is), regardless of "parental
> >>> decisions."
> >> Can a minor be emancipated and live with the parents?
> > That's the point! Presumably they wouldn't want to.
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emancipation_of_minors

> Which makes it a vastly bigger effort and not really comparable. Do
> those emancipated minors get housing from the state?

Which state?

They want to be treated as adults, so they are treated the same
as other adults. Maybe sometimes there's a "burden on society"
criterion. Presumably they have access to the welfare system.

* Peter T. Daniels:

> On Tuesday, July 19, 2022 at 9:54:28 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
>> * Peter T. Daniels:
>>> On Saturday, July 16, 2022 at 1:07:42 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
>>>> * Peter T. Daniels:
>>>>> On Saturday, July 16, 2022 at 9:23:51 AM UTC-4, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>>>>> On Friday, July 15, 2022 at 6:18:09 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
>>>>>>> * Peter T. Daniels:
>>>>>>> > On Friday, July 15, 2022 at 12:13:22 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
>>>>>>> >> * Peter T. Daniels:
>>>>>>> >>> On Friday, July 15, 2022 at 9:04:46 AM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
>
>>>>>>> >>>> Your government is never concerned with the free exercise of religion?
>>>>>>> >>> Of course not. Congress and (after the XIVth Amendment) the States
>>>>>>> >>> are prohibited from interfering.
>>>>>>> >> I see. It would be strictly a matter of the courts then. They deal with
>>>>>>> >> such requests constantly.
>>>>>>> >> So for a parallel to the German law in question, I'd expect a SCOTUS
>>>>>>> >> decision. But I have the feeling that the rights of children to decide
>>>>>>> >> for themselves aren't high priority in the US.
>>>>>>> > Define "child."
>>>>>>> Minor, whatever.
>>>>> "Minor" is a legal term, "child" isn't.
>>>> That would depend on the jurisdiction.
>>>> The Convention on the Rights of the Child covers people under 18, so I
>>>> guess they thought "child" was the word that travels best. Well, every
>>>> member of the UN except the US has ratified it.
>>> In what variety of English is a late-teenager a "child"? That works
>>> in Italian, where a "ragazzo": is up to 25 or so.
>>> English-speakers would expect a Convention on the Rights of the
>>> Child to protect pre-teens, adolescents at the eldest.
>>>>>>> Take medical consent. In Quebec, the age is 14. So, at least in
>>>>>>> principle, a 14-year-old can get prescription contraceptives or even an
>>>>>>> abortion, and the doctors can't tell the parents about it.
>>>>>>> My impression is that in most of the US, a minor living with or
>>>>>>> financially dependent on the parents can't make such decisions.
>>>>> Do you know about "emancipated minor"?
>>>>>>> A judge in Alabama, of all places, and a Trump appointee no less,
>>>>>>> decided that outlawing gender-affirming care is an unwarranted
>>>>>>> interference with parental decisions. Never mind the right of the minor
>>>>>>> to get the best medical care, it's the parents who get protection for
>>>>>>> their decisions good or bad.
>>>>> Obviously not, as shown by this case. The same judge would
>>>>> presumably rule in favor of a minor who (knew they) needed
>>>>> "gender-affirming care" (whatever that is), regardless of "parental
>>>>> decisions."
>>>> Can a minor be emancipated and live with the parents?
>>> That's the point! Presumably they wouldn't want to.
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emancipation_of_minors
>
>> Which makes it a vastly bigger effort and not really comparable. Do
>> those emancipated minors get housing from the state?
>
> Which state?

That was "the state" in the sense of "the polity"; I don't care which
level of government would be in charge.

> They want to be treated as adults, so they are treated the same
> as other adults. Maybe sometimes there's a "burden on society"
> criterion. Presumably they have access to the welfare system.

Only because you presuppose that medical decisions are adult decisions.

Even in the US, 16-year-olds are treated "as adults" when it comes to
driving cars, and 20-year-olds "as minors" when it comes to drinking
alcohol (in Germany, you acquire both of these rights, in their
fullness, at the age of maturity).

While many US states allow medical decisions only to emancipated minors,
in other states, this right sets in at a certain age, as in more
civilized countries. Alabama is a prime example for that. E.g., "Minors
age 12 and older may consent for STD testing and treatment.", "Minors of
any age may consent to prenatal care and childbirth services. Minors of
any age may consent to medical care for their child", "Alabama state law
allows a minor of any age to consent to services for problems related to
alcohol or drugs without parental consent."

--
The need of a personal pronoun of the singular number and common
gender is so desperate, urgent, imperative, that ... it should long
since have grown on our speech -- The Atlantic Monthly (1878)

On Wednesday, July 20, 2022 at 12:50:46 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> * Peter T. Daniels:
>
> > On Tuesday, July 19, 2022 at 9:54:28 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> >> * Peter T. Daniels:
> >>> On Saturday, July 16, 2022 at 1:07:42 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> >>>> * Peter T. Daniels:
> >>>>> On Saturday, July 16, 2022 at 9:23:51 AM UTC-4, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>>>>> On Friday, July 15, 2022 at 6:18:09 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> >>>>>>> * Peter T. Daniels:
> >>>>>>> > On Friday, July 15, 2022 at 12:13:22 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> >>>>>>> >> * Peter T. Daniels:
> >>>>>>> >>> On Friday, July 15, 2022 at 9:04:46 AM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> >>>>>>> >>>> Your government is never concerned with the free exercise of religion?
> >>>>>>> >>> Of course not. Congress and (after the XIVth Amendment) the States
> >>>>>>> >>> are prohibited from interfering.
> >>>>>>> >> I see. It would be strictly a matter of the courts then. They deal with
> >>>>>>> >> such requests constantly.
> >>>>>>> >> So for a parallel to the German law in question, I'd expect a SCOTUS
> >>>>>>> >> decision. But I have the feeling that the rights of children to decide
> >>>>>>> >> for themselves aren't high priority in the US.
> >>>>>>> > Define "child."
> >>>>>>> Minor, whatever.
> >>>>> "Minor" is a legal term, "child" isn't.
> >>>> That would depend on the jurisdiction.
> >>>> The Convention on the Rights of the Child covers people under 18, so I
> >>>> guess they thought "child" was the word that travels best. Well, every
> >>>> member of the UN except the US has ratified it.
> >>> In what variety of English is a late-teenager a "child"? That works
> >>> in Italian, where a "ragazzo": is up to 25 or so.
> >>> English-speakers would expect a Convention on the Rights of the
> >>> Child to protect pre-teens, adolescents at the eldest.
> >>>>>>> Take medical consent. In Quebec, the age is 14. So, at least in
> >>>>>>> principle, a 14-year-old can get prescription contraceptives or even an
> >>>>>>> abortion, and the doctors can't tell the parents about it.
> >>>>>>> My impression is that in most of the US, a minor living with or
> >>>>>>> financially dependent on the parents can't make such decisions.
> >>>>> Do you know about "emancipated minor"?
> >>>>>>> A judge in Alabama, of all places, and a Trump appointee no less,
> >>>>>>> decided that outlawing gender-affirming care is an unwarranted
> >>>>>>> interference with parental decisions. Never mind the right of the minor
> >>>>>>> to get the best medical care, it's the parents who get protection for
> >>>>>>> their decisions good or bad.
> >>>>> Obviously not, as shown by this case. The same judge would
> >>>>> presumably rule in favor of a minor who (knew they) needed
> >>>>> "gender-affirming care" (whatever that is), regardless of "parental
> >>>>> decisions."
> >>>> Can a minor be emancipated and live with the parents?
> >>> That's the point! Presumably they wouldn't want to.
> >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emancipation_of_minors
> >> Which makes it a vastly bigger effort and not really comparable. Do
> >> those emancipated minors get housing from the state?
> > Which state?
>
> That was "the state" in the sense of "the polity"; I don't care which
> level of government would be in charge.

we say "the government"

> > They want to be treated as adults, so they are treated the same
> > as other adults. Maybe sometimes there's a "burden on society"
> > criterion. Presumably they have access to the welfare system.
>
> Only because you presuppose that medical decisions are adult decisions.

What on earth do "medical decisions" have to do with whether an
emancipated minor can support themself?

> Even in the US, 16-year-olds are treated "as adults" when it comes to
> driving cars, and 20-year-olds "as minors" when it comes to drinking
> alcohol (in Germany, you acquire both of these rights, in their
> fullness, at the age of maturity).

The drinking age was 18 when I was in college. I don't know when
it was raised (it wouldn't affect me at all, regardless of whether I was
21 yet). Traffic accidents went down.

The voting age was lowered to 18 because Congress was pressured
into realizing that if you can be drafted into a war, you should have a
say in who was doing the drafting. That one did affect me: if it hadn't
happened, I would have missed being able to vote for McGovern by
about a month.

> While many US states allow medical decisions only to emancipated minors,
> in other states, this right sets in at a certain age, as in more
> civilized countries. Alabama is a prime example for that. E.g., "Minors
> age 12 and older may consent for STD testing and treatment.", "Minors of
> any age may consent to prenatal care and childbirth services. Minors of
> any age may consent to medical care for their child", "Alabama state law
> allows a minor of any age to consent to services for problems related to
> alcohol or drugs without parental consent."

Note the implication that minors are assumed to have children.

You've found a whole lot to like about Alabama the last couple of days.
You might want to check out its governor.

* Adam Funk:

> On 2022-07-20, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>
>> On 20/07/2022 8:14 am, Adam Funk wrote:
>>> I thought some AUErs might find this Fesshole amusing:
>>>
>>> I write the horoscopes for a popular publication. If anyone asks, I
>>> tell them charting likely outcomes is really complex and time
>>> consuming. That's bollocks; I make it all up.
>>>
>>> <https://twitter.com/fesshole/status/1549475419262488576>
>>
>> I enjoyed Barry Potts's reply: "Always thought it was bullshit.
>> But then again I am a Sagittarius and we're quite sceptical."
>
> I think it's an old joke but it's a good one.

"I'm a Capricorn. We don't believe in astrology"

I can't resist a lot of the time.

--
Be afraid of the lame - They'll inherit your legs
Be afraid of the old - They'll inherit your souls
-- Regina Spektor, Après moi

On Monday, Sam Plusnet queried:
> On 04-Jul-22 17:44, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
>> Interesting. Maybe each astrologer should be judged and awarded a
>> star-rating?
>
> Not too sure how data could be collected for this porpoise.

When was it born?

/dps

--
"I am not given to exaggeration, and when I say a thing I mean it"
_Roughing It_, Mark Twain

Watch this space, where Jerry Friedman advised that...
> On Monday, July 4, 2022 at 10:44:29 AM UTC-6, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:37:49 -0700 (PDT)
>> Jerry Friedman <jerry_f...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> ...
>
>>> The /Santa Fe Reporter/, a free weekly, used to carry the colorfully
>>> written horoscopes by Rob Brezsny, and maybe still does.
>>>
>>> https://freewillastrology.com
>>>
>>> Some years ago, back when I used to look at the /Reporter/ occasionally,
>>> there was a letter complaining that Brezsny's horoscopes were mere
>>> entertainment and the paper shouldn't get their astrology out of town when
>>> there were excellent /genuine/ astrologers in Santa Fe.
>>>
>> Interesting. Maybe each astrologer should be judged and awarded a
>> star-rating?
>
> With a stern rating from the German judge.

Let's have flowers growing up the estrella.

/dps

--
Maybe C282Y is simply one of the hangers-on, a groupie following a
future guitar god of the human genome: an allele with undiscovered
virtuosity, currently soloing in obscurity in Mom's garage.
Bradley Wertheim, theAtlantic.com, Jan 10 2013

Tuesday, Adam Funk observed:
> On 2022-07-04, Tony Cooper wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 04 Jul 2022 14:19:50 -0700, Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 04 Jul 2022 11:47:57 -0400, Tony Cooper
>>> <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 04 Jul 2022 08:09:22 -0700, Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 04 Jul 2022 01:22:29 -0400, Tony Cooper
>>>>> <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> If the newspaper accepts and prints letters to the editor from
>>>>>> readers, those letters will often be non-factual opinions. Of course,
>>>>>> if you disagree with that opinion because your opinion is the right
>>>>>> one, some of those letters will be lies.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I've never read letters to the editor in any newspaper. I have no
>>>>> interest in the opinions of their readers.
>>>>
>>>> If you wanted to declare that you are a closed-minded person who feels
>>>> his own opinions are the only ones that count,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> No, that's not the case and it's not my point at all. I simply don't
>>> want to read the opinions of everyone who wants his opinions published
>>> in a newspaper. I value the opinions of those who I know and respect,
>>> not of someone who wants to have his opinions published in a
>>> newspaper.
>>>
>>>
>>>> you couldn't have done
>>>> it more clearly than you have above.
>>
>> Interesting. You value the opinions of those you know and respect,
>> but you won't read the opinions of those you don't already know and
>> respect. How is that anything but closed-minded?
>>
>> The inference above is that anyone who publishes their opinions in a
>> newspaper is not someone you want to know or would ever respect.
>>
>> If you don't read the letters to the editor how do you know that one
>> of your known and respected people isn't sending letters t the editor?
>
> Maybe he's already read enough of them to surmise that (in his
> newspaper, at least) they are usually written by cranks?
>
> I don't think anyone is obliged to read everything in the
> newspaper. You choose the bits that, based on previous experience, you
> think are most interesting or useful.

Isn't it cowardly not read everything that is pos..., um, printed?

/dps

--
Who, me? And what lacuna?

On Monday, July 25, 2022 at 3:03:56 AM UTC-4, snide...@gmail.com wrote:

> Isn't it cowardly not read everything that is pos..., um, printed?

It is cowardly to choose to not read something, and then to comment
on what has not been read.