When does something deserve the tribute of rational response?
I have just been doing a certain amount of codslapping on Twitter caused by a confusion over the meaning of 'archives', which in this case meant 'digitised back issues of a journal'.
Which I might have sighed and let go, but that this received a response from an official library person referring them to the archives department to answer their question (which was, anyway, I depose, answered by the website containing the digitised journal).
Which is a thing that has been irking me for decades.
Journals do have archives (well, some of them do). But that's the record of the behind-the-scenes work that went into the published end result.
Not the actual issues of the journal.
The grudges, the peeves, and the niggles are pretty much rioting about this one.
***
However, some bloke writing about 'cutting edge science fiction' when we think that 'urgent phallic' rather than 'cutting edge' is the operative word?
From my glance at it I think it was proceeding from that recurrent false premise about Real Science/Prediction of Future etc quite apart from its antiquated gender bias.
Cod stocks, I may remind you, are an endangered resource. This entry was originally posted at http://oursin.dreamwidth.org/2404586.html. Please comment there using OpenID. View
comments.