Re: [OT[UnOfficial Unsubscribe FAQ

[Paul Morgan <paulswm@earthlink.net>]

On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 13:09:42 -0600, Kent West wrote:


> 
> Several words have been used in this thread (it happens in other threads 
> also) that have traditionally been considered "foul language", at least 
> in my Texan culture, although without a standard definition of "foul 
> language" it's hard to claim with any absolute certainty that "this" 
> word is foul and "that" word is not. Still, my momma would've whooped me 
> good for using some of that language, and the FCC would have come down 
> hard on any broadcaster using such language 10 or 15 years ago, although 
> lately it seems to let almost anything on the airwaves. My general 
> thought is that if most people would not say it in church or in front of 
> a pastor/preacher/priest/rabbi/mom, it's foul language.

That's a pretty good definition.

With regard to foul language in posts, I think that the net effect is
probably that it demeans the poster more than it offends the reader.

-- 
....................paul

Programming without a hex editor is like watchmaking without a hammer.