From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS53758 23.128.96.0/24 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED, SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 456A71F5AE for ; Wed, 12 May 2021 04:11:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229787AbhELEMr (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 May 2021 00:12:47 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:57284 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229495AbhELEMr (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 May 2021 00:12:47 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.221.27]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F355B05E; Wed, 12 May 2021 04:11:39 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 12 May 2021 06:11:38 +0200 From: Michal =?iso-8859-1?Q?Such=E1nek?= To: Felipe Contreras Cc: Varun Varada , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc: replace jargon word "impact" with "effect"/"affect" Message-ID: <20210512041138.GO12700@kitsune.suse.cz> References: <20210406092440.GZ6564@kitsune.suse.cz> <609ad9473d535_6011e2082@natae.notmuch> <20210511195723.GL12700@kitsune.suse.cz> <609b47043a719_678ff208e@natae.notmuch> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <609b47043a719_678ff208e@natae.notmuch> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 10:09:56PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > Michal Suchánek wrote: > > On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 02:21:43PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > > > Michal Suchánek wrote: > > > > > If you are concerned about correctness and clarity of the documentation please > > > > avoid spreading misinformation. > > > > > > Under certain definition of "jaron" Varun's statement would be > > > incorrect, but not under all definitions. If you use the definition > > > I stated above, "impact" can be considered jargon, because it's a bit > > > obscure language. > > > > Do you have any frequency data that supports your claim that the word > > 'impact' is obscure? > > This is not how logic works. > > If I don't have frequency data that supports $x, but you have no > frequency data that supports !$x, then we return to the default position; > we don't know if $x is true or not. > > Do **you** have any frequency data that supports the negative claim that > the word "impact" is not obscure? I don't need that data. You are proposing a change so it is your duty to support your claim that the change is worthwhile. Otherwise it's a change just for the sake of change. > > > The bar for change should be that the word as used is very unfitting or > > unintelligible. > > No. The bar is that **nobody** have any problem with "affect", and some > people have a problem with "impact". And that's established how, specifically? Thanks Michal