[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Asrg] "ham" <i>is</i> ridiculous
Title: "ham" <i>is</i>
ridiculous
i agree. "ham" just sounds stupid. the context is
vague, the meaning is ambiguous. i have nothing against
colloquialisms, but seriously... ham? you've got to be kidding.
we should use an acronym instead, something along the lines of SVN
(signal verses noise) or AIM (acceptable interpersonal mail) etc. im
sure someone can come up with a good one.
At 14:46 +0100 4/3/03, Matt Sergeant
wrote:
On Wednesday, Apr 2, 2003, at 21:56
Europe/London, Jim Youll wrote:
I love statistics, but is it possible
that not-spam could be possibly called "not spam" rather
than "ham" in the research-and-report context? The word
"spam" creates enough difficulty on its own without adding
another "zany techie word."
"Ham" is in very common use now in the anti-spam community.
I don't see any valid reason to stop using it.
It's a cute, meaningless, trite word.
Do you want to be taken seriously, or just use the latest overly
clever geek phrase
because you can?
I don't see this sort of behavior in any other serious research
community, and for
that matter other than the April 1 RFCs, IETF work generally has
always been a fairly
sober affair using precise language rather than clever language.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg