[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: corrupt vulgate

>> = Don Westblade
> = Michael Bushnell


Is accuracy of the text important?

>>   I would reply that this is always important and and therefore always a
>>   problem.
>
> That is because you apparently have a strikingly limited idea of why
> the Vulgate would be useful.  One possibility (that I actually
> considered, until it became too difficult to find the text) was that I
> could put pithy Latin quotes from the psalms in my .signature.  It
> really wouldn't matter to me if there were an error, because the cost
> would be minimal.

You call that application "useful"?  I call it trivial.  I doubt, from
what I have read so far of your postings, that you are an academic--at
least not one in any area of the humanities.  I'm not just name calling
here.  Academics expect other academics to hold to certain standards of
reliability.  Those who don't hold to them get shot down.  (That's what
peer review is all about.)  Calling something a "Vulgate" when it is
missing an entire book is not up to the standards of academic
reliability.  It is a pitfall to academics, most of whom don't know a
checksum from a hole in the wall--AND SHOULDN'T HAVE TO.  No more than
they should have to know how an internal combustion engine works in
order to drive a car.

Michael, I dare you to try to move this discussion to a more appropriate
forum, e.g., the "corpora" discussion which specializes in text corpora. 
I bet you a dollar that you'd be laughed off the net and flamed to a
crisp.  Your position is untenable.

> As for me, the existing channel is insufficient.  Using gopher is
> difficult for me; 

Me too.  I'm connected only by uucp.

> sending out a registration form is draconian.  The
> text should be freely available.  

Give me a break.  Draconian?? Do you know what that word means?  I doubt
it.  Look it up.  Comparing sending in a registration form for a FREE
text to Draco is ridiculous (i.e., worthy of ridicule).

> I intend to find a copy by some
> means (not involving subterfuge or fraud) and then make it as publicly
> available as I can.  If that means I will have to give out the
> slightly broken text in Finland, so be it.  That's better than nothing
> at all.  

Absolutely not, for any serious work with texts.  It will give
misleading statistical analysis, it will result in missed targets in
word searches.

You are free to put whatever freely distributable text wherever you
want, but DON'T call it a Vulgate UNLESS IT REALLY IS ONE!  If it is
labelled "Vulgate" then it should be 100% unadulterated Vulgate.  If it
is only part of a Vulgate then name it appropriately.

To do otherwise is to engage in offensively anti-social and
anti-academic behaviour.  And if you are someone who enjoys being
offensive, and doesn't care about academic study, be prepared to pay the
price and don't whine about the flames, loneliness, persecution, etc.,
that you will undoubtedly receive, when people rely on your broken text
for their research and later find that you've lead them down the garden
path.

--
Sterling G. Bjorndahl, bjorndahl@Augustana.AB.CA or bjorndahl@camrose.uucp
Augustana University College, Camrose, Alberta, Canada      (403) 679-1100
  When dealing with computers, a little paranoia is usually appropriate.
Follow-Ups: