http://www.moderation.org.uk/3display_post.php?pst_id=80151

Post Id:80151

Reject reason given -->
This post has insufficient new material. Similar data have already
been posted.

===================================================

Does he also avoid the cracks in the pavement?

Christopher Bowlas  wrote:

> http://www.moderation.org.uk/3display_post.php?pst_id=80151
> Post Id:80151
> Reject reason given -->
> This post has insufficient new material. Similar data have already
> been posted.
> 
> ===================================================
> 
> Does he also avoid the cracks in the pavement?


Sorry, but what is your point?
It was perfectly valid to reject it, as the same info had already been
posted.
Alan.

-- 
To reply by e-mail, change the ' + ' to 'plus'.

A.Lee <alan@darkroom.+.com> wrote:

> Christopher Bowlas  wrote:
> 
> > http://www.moderation.org.uk/3display_post.php?pst_id=80151
> > Post Id:80151
> > Reject reason given -->
> > This post has insufficient new material. Similar data have already
> > been posted.
> > 
> > ===================================================
> > 
> > Does he also avoid the cracks in the pavement?
> 
> 
> Sorry, but what is your point?

That 'data' is plural, but only pedants observe this.

Daniele

On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 20:12:33 +0100
real-not-anti-spam-address@apple-juice.co.uk (D.M. Procida) wrote:

> That 'data' is plural, but only pedants observe this.
> 
Of course some of us may suggest that only the lazy and ignorant treat
it as singular ...

Rob Morley wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 20:12:33 +0100
> real-not-anti-spam-address@apple-juice.co.uk (D.M. Procida) wrote:
> 
>> That 'data' is plural, but only pedants observe this.
>>
> Of course some of us may suggest that only the lazy and ignorant treat
> it as singular ...

That said, the concept of a datum is generally a lonely little thing.
You can't even win a pub quiz with one datum.

I'm quite an ardent pedant - I don't think it's a bad thing, I think
it's pointing out corner cutting. If I don't know what a word means I'll
avoid using it until I can find out. The same diligence that you check
out new words with stops you using literally as an intensifier and
insulting other races etc at the same time.

At some point the meanings of words will diverge so much that it'll
become what some people figure it means and what it actually means and
the people in the two camps will have no way of communicating.

"A.Lee" <alan@darkroom.+.com> wrote in message 
news:1j7fr50.12tn67e14pso1sN%alan@darkroom.+.com...
> Christopher Bowlas  wrote:
>
>> http://www.moderation.org.uk/3display_post.php?pst_id=80151
>> Post Id:80151
>> Reject reason given -->
>> This post has insufficient new material. Similar data have already
>> been posted.
>>
>> ===================================================
>>
>> Does he also avoid the cracks in the pavement?
>
>
> Sorry, but what is your point?
> It was perfectly valid to reject it, as the same info had already been
> posted.
> Alan.


Any further comment on that, Chris? Or were you going to argue that the 
moderator's decision was wrong. And that would be bizarre, wouldn't it? :)

On Oct 12, 9:11 am, "The Todal"  wrote:
> "A.Lee" <a...@darkroom..com> wrote in message
>
> news:1j7fr50.12tn67e14pso1sN%alan@darkroom..com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > Christopher Bowlas  wrote:
>
> >>http://www.moderation.org.uk/3display_post.php?pst_id=80151
> >> Post Id:80151
> >> Reject reason given -->
> >> This post has insufficient new material. Similar data have already
> >> been posted.
>
> >> ===================================================
>
> >> Does he also avoid the cracks in the pavement?
>
> > Sorry, but what is your point?
> > It was perfectly valid to reject it, as the same info had already been
> > posted.
> > Alan.
>
> Any further comment on that, Chris? Or were you going to argue that the
> moderator's decision was wrong. And that would be bizarre, wouldn't it? :I remain in two minds on this.

Christopher Bowlas wrote:
> On Oct 12, 9:11 am, "The Todal"  wrote:
>> "A.Lee" <a...@darkroom.+.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:1j7fr50.12tn67e14pso1sN%alan@darkroom.+.com...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Christopher Bowlas  wrote:
>>>> http://www.moderation.org.uk/3display_post.php?pst_id=80151
>>>> Post Id:80151
>>>> Reject reason given -->
>>>> This post has insufficient new material. Similar data have already
>>>> been posted.
>>>> ===================================================
>>>> Does he also avoid the cracks in the pavement?
>>> Sorry, but what is your point?
>>> It was perfectly valid to reject it, as the same info had already been
>>> posted.
>>> Alan.
>> Any further comment on that, Chris? Or were you going to argue that the
>> moderator's decision was wrong. And that would be bizarre, wouldn't it? :)
> 
> I remain in two minds on this.

Just to clarify - is the complaint still that the moderator has an
accurate grasp of the English language?

On 12 Oct, 00:38, Rob Morley  wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 20:12:33 +0100
>
> real-not-anti-spam-addr...@apple-juice.co.uk (D.M. Procida) wrote:
> > That 'data' is plural, but only pedants observe this.
>
> Of course some of us may suggest that only the lazy and ignorant treat
> it as singular ...

I think of it more as efficiency. "Data" has become synonymous with
"information", but with an emphasis on the information being in a
mathematical or digital form.

Meanings in language have no absolute definition, and are merely
negotiated. And for most people, language is used for the purpose of
communication. People who insist on using language in an unusual way
are not only using language incorrectly (because they are using
formations that are deprecated by speakers of the language), but they
are actually worse at communicating their meaning because one must
think harder to extract meaning from what is being said.

Of course, there is something to be said for retaining complexity when
necessary, but there is also something to be said for pruning out
unnecessary complexity or repurposing existing words to meet new
requirements.

On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 01:24:27 -0700 (PDT)
Ste  wrote:

> On 12 Oct, 00:38, Rob Morley  wrote:
> > On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 20:12:33 +0100
> >
> > real-not-anti-spam-addr...@apple-juice.co.uk (D.M. Procida) wrote:
> > > That 'data' is plural, but only pedants observe this.
> >
> > Of course some of us may suggest that only the lazy and ignorant
> > treat it as singular ...
> 
> I think of it more as efficiency. "Data" has become synonymous with
> "information", but with an emphasis on the information being in a
> mathematical or digital form.

That's just wrong - data are recorded measurements, while information
is meaning /extracted from/ those measurements by analysis.

In message <20091015125552.1bbcf57d@bluemoon>, Rob Morley 
 writes
>On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 01:24:27 -0700 (PDT)
>Ste  wrote:
>
>> On 12 Oct, 00:38, Rob Morley  wrote:
>> > On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 20:12:33 +0100
>> >
>> > real-not-anti-spam-addr...@apple-juice.co.uk (D.M. Procida) wrote:
>> > > That 'data' is plural, but only pedants observe this.
>> >
>> > Of course some of us may suggest that only the lazy and ignorant
>> > treat it as singular ...
>>
>> I think of it more as efficiency. "Data" has become synonymous with
>> "information", but with an emphasis on the information being in a
>> mathematical or digital form.
>
>That's just wrong - data are recorded measurements, while information
>is meaning /extracted from/ those measurements by analysis.
>
I think that you're making things up a little. Wikipedia gives a pretty 
fair description of what "datum" and "data" are.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data

While it's obvious that neither word is used in the original Latin 
sense, I can't see how you can claim that "information" means 'extracted 
from measurements by analysis'. Of course, it may do, but not 
necessarily. I'm one of those 'lazy and ignorant' people who always uses 
"data" as a singular 'mass noun', and this may refer to raw test 
results, or as results extracted from these results, and summarised. I 
will try not to feel too badly about it.
-- 
Ian

Ian Jackson wrote:
> In message <20091015125552.1bbcf57d@bluemoon>, Rob Morley
>  writes
>> On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 01:24:27 -0700 (PDT)
>> Ste  wrote:
>>
>>> On 12 Oct, 00:38, Rob Morley  wrote:
>>> > On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 20:12:33 +0100
>>> >
>>> > real-not-anti-spam-addr...@apple-juice.co.uk (D.M. Procida) wrote:
>>> > > That 'data' is plural, but only pedants observe this.
>>> >
>>> > Of course some of us may suggest that only the lazy and ignorant
>>> > treat it as singular ...
>>>
>>> I think of it more as efficiency. "Data" has become synonymous with
>>> "information", but with an emphasis on the information being in a
>>> mathematical or digital form.
>>
>> That's just wrong - data are recorded measurements, while information
>> is meaning /extracted from/ those measurements by analysis.
>>
> I think that you're making things up a little. Wikipedia gives a pretty
> fair description of what "datum" and "data" are.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data
> 
> While it's obvious that neither word is used in the original Latin
> sense, I can't see how you can claim that "information" means 'extracted
> from measurements by analysis'. Of course, it may do, but not
> necessarily. I'm one of those 'lazy and ignorant' people who always uses
> "data" as a singular 'mass noun', and this may refer to raw test
> result*/s/*, or as result*/s/* extracted from these result*/s/*, and summarised. I
> will try not to feel too badly about it.

Actually, you are using it as a plural. You just don't realise you are.

I think everyone seems to have forgotten that the issue stems from
someone being correct and this, instead of being applauded or just
accepted as a good state of things has been dismissed as "pedantry".

It might not match your personalised, informal sense of the word but
fits what you'd find in the the dictionary. It is also grammatically
consistent with the rest of the sentence. I think it's odd and a bit
churlish to hold someone up to ridicule for being "too right."

On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 13:20:36 +0100
Ian Jackson  wrote:

> In message <20091015125552.1bbcf57d@bluemoon>, Rob Morley 
>  writes

> >That's just wrong - data are recorded measurements, while information
> >is meaning /extracted from/ those measurements by analysis.
> >
> I think that you're making things up a little. Wikipedia gives a
> pretty fair description of what "datum" and "data" are.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data
> 
So you didn't understand the first paragraph on that page?

On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 12:55:52 +0100, Rob Morley 
wrote:

>On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 01:24:27 -0700 (PDT)
>Ste  wrote:
>
>> On 12 Oct, 00:38, Rob Morley  wrote:
>> > On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 20:12:33 +0100
>> >
>> > real-not-anti-spam-addr...@apple-juice.co.uk (D.M. Procida) wrote:
>> > > That 'data' is plural, but only pedants observe this.
>> >
>> > Of course some of us may suggest that only the lazy and ignorant
>> > treat it as singular ...
>> 
>> I think of it more as efficiency. "Data" has become synonymous with
>> "information", but with an emphasis on the information being in a
>> mathematical or digital form.
>
>That's just wrong - data are recorded measurements, while information
>is meaning /extracted from/ those measurements by analysis.


OED:

Datum : A thing given or granted; something known or assumed as fact,
and made the basis of reasoning or calculation; an assumption or
premiss from which inferences are drawn.


No mention of recorded measurements

--  

British Medical Association (BMA)
View on helmets:

Several studies provided solid scientific evidence that bicycle helmets
protect against head, brain, severe brain and facial injuries,
as well as death, as a result of cycling accidents

Judith M Smith wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 12:55:52 +0100, Rob Morley 
> wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 01:24:27 -0700 (PDT)
>> Ste  wrote:
>>
>>> On 12 Oct, 00:38, Rob Morley  wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 20:12:33 +0100
>>>>
>>>> real-not-anti-spam-addr...@apple-juice.co.uk (D.M. Procida) wrote:
>>>>> That 'data' is plural, but only pedants observe this.
>>>> Of course some of us may suggest that only the lazy and ignorant
>>>> treat it as singular ...
>>> I think of it more as efficiency. "Data" has become synonymous with
>>> "information", but with an emphasis on the information being in a
>>> mathematical or digital form.
>> That's just wrong - data are recorded measurements, while information
>> is meaning /extracted from/ those measurements by analysis.
> 
> 
> OED:
> 
> Datum : A thing given or granted; something known or assumed as fact,
> and made the basis of reasoning or calculation; an assumption or
> premiss from which inferences are drawn.
> 
> 
> No mention of recorded measurements
> 

Are measurements not known or assumed as fact and made on the basis of
reasoning or calculation?

On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 22:51:14 +0100, smr 
wrote:

>Judith M Smith wrote:
>> On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 12:55:52 +0100, Rob Morley 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 01:24:27 -0700 (PDT)
>>> Ste  wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12 Oct, 00:38, Rob Morley  wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 20:12:33 +0100
>>>>>
>>>>> real-not-anti-spam-addr...@apple-juice.co.uk (D.M. Procida) wrote:
>>>>>> That 'data' is plural, but only pedants observe this.
>>>>> Of course some of us may suggest that only the lazy and ignorant
>>>>> treat it as singular ...
>>>> I think of it more as efficiency. "Data" has become synonymous with
>>>> "information", but with an emphasis on the information being in a
>>>> mathematical or digital form.
>>> That's just wrong - data are recorded measurements, while information
>>> is meaning /extracted from/ those measurements by analysis.
>> 
>> 
>> OED:
>> 
>> Datum : A thing given or granted; something known or assumed as fact,
>> and made the basis of reasoning or calculation; an assumption or
>> premiss from which inferences are drawn.
>> 
>> 
>> No mention of recorded measurements
>> 
>
>Are measurements not known or assumed as fact and made on the basis of
>reasoning or calculation?


the point is that data does not have to be "recorded measurements" -
it can just be information

But you knew that didn't you?




--  

British Medical Association (BMA)
View on helmets:

Several studies provided solid scientific evidence that bicycle helmets
protect against head, brain, severe brain and facial injuries,
as well as death, as a result of cycling accidents

jms wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 22:51:14 +0100, smr 
> wrote:
> 
>> Judith M Smith wrote:
>>> On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 12:55:52 +0100, Rob Morley 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 01:24:27 -0700 (PDT)
>>>> Ste  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 12 Oct, 00:38, Rob Morley  wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 20:12:33 +0100
>>>>>>
>>>>>> real-not-anti-spam-addr...@apple-juice.co.uk (D.M. Procida) wrote:
>>>>>>> That 'data' is plural, but only pedants observe this.
>>>>>> Of course some of us may suggest that only the lazy and ignorant
>>>>>> treat it as singular ...
>>>>> I think of it more as efficiency. "Data" has become synonymous with
>>>>> "information", but with an emphasis on the information being in a
>>>>> mathematical or digital form.
>>>> That's just wrong - data are recorded measurements, while information
>>>> is meaning /extracted from/ those measurements by analysis.
>>>
>>> OED:
>>>
>>> Datum : A thing given or granted; something known or assumed as fact,
>>> and made the basis of reasoning or calculation; an assumption or
>>> premiss from which inferences are drawn.
>>>
>>> No mention of recorded measurements
>>>
>> Are measurements not known or assumed as fact and made on the basis of
>> reasoning or calculation?
> 
> the point is that data does not have to be "recorded measurements" -
> it can just be information
> 
> But you knew that didn't you?
> 

Ah, I'd been following the other line of the thread, apologies. Yeah,
you really can't be too restrictive about what data can consist of,
recorded measurements are a type of data rather than data is recorded
measurements.