RE: I had say it because I was afraid no one else would.

["McLauchlan, Kevin" <Kevin -dot- McLauchlan -at- safenet-inc -dot- com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: 
> techwr-l-bounces+kevin -dot- mclauchlan=safenet-inc -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr
-l.com [mailto:techwr-l-bounces+kevin.mclauchlan=safenet->
inc -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com] On Behalf Of Michael West
> Sent: Friday, February 06, 2009 6:32 AM
> To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> Subject: RE: I had say it because I was afraid no one else would.
> 
> > Jerry Kindall ventured:
> 
> > > I suppose "fraudster" is
> 
> > > a useful enough umbrella term for actual criminals.  With
> 
> > > half a million uses already recorded on Google, though, 
> > > I think the branding ship has sailed.
> 
> > 
> 
> > But maybe 9/10 of the Google hits are discussions like this one.
> 
>  
> 
> It's easy enough to look and see, isn't it?

That was meant as humo[u]r.  See way below.

But, come to think of it, no, it's not all that easy to check out half a
million Google hits to see whether they fall into this-or-that category.
As we all know, the first couple of pages of Google (or Yahoo, or other
search engine) hits will be the most relevant, with succeeding ones
being farther and farther from relevance. Unless, of course, you craft
your search in very intricate fashion to show just the ones you want to
see... In which case, you'll no longer get half a million of them.  I'd
have to put considerable work into devising a search for "fraudster"
that would exclude occurrences in mailing lists, forums, and other
venues about language, writing, terminology, etc.  Other people, of
course, have better search skills and would cobble one together in ten
seconds...   :-)
 
> And the answer is No. "Fraudster" is common usage in 
> mainstream news media,
> and is recognized in mainstream dictionaries.
> 
> It doesn't mean what "fraud" means, and therefore has a 
> useful function in
> the language, describing a particular type of swindler.
> 
> I know people who are frauds. As far as I know, none of them 
> are swindlers.

I agree. To me, the word does have value, for exactly those reasons.
I'm in the language-maven camp that says any change to the language that
adds value is a good change, but any change that subtracts value (like
perpetuating mistakes of one word for another until the very concept of
one is no longer expressable) is bad.

 - Kevin

The information contained in this electronic mail transmission 
may be privileged and confidential, and therefore, protected 
from disclosure. If you have received this communication in 
error, please notify us immediately by replying to this 
message and deleting it from your computer without copying 
or disclosing it.


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

ComponentOne Doc-To-Help 2009 is your all-in-one authoring and publishing 
solution. Author in Doc-To-Help's XML-based editor,  Microsoft Word or 
HTML and publish to the Web, Help systems or printed manuals. 
http://www.doctohelp.com

Help & Manual 5: The complete help authoring tool for individual
authors and teams. Professional power, intuitive interface. Write
once, publish to 8 formats. Multi-user authoring and version control! http://www.helpandmanual.com/

---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- 

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
or visit http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/archive%40web.techwr-l.com


To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com

Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-  Visit
http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info. 

Please move off-topic discussions to the Chat list, at:
http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/listinfo/techwr-l-chat