Newsgroups: rec.arts.int-fiction
Path: nntp.gmd.de!news.ruhr-uni-bochum.de!news-koe1.dfn.de!news-kar1.dfn.de!news.nacamar.de!uunet!in1.uu.net!205.252.116.190!feed1.news.erols.com!news.bconnex.net!news2.insinc.net!thinkage.on.ca!news
From: David Adrien Tanguay <dat@thinkage.on.ca>
Subject: Re: Scoring implementation
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <32B94232.353B@thinkage.on.ca>
Sender: news@thinkage.on.ca
Reply-To: dat@thinkage.on.ca
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: Thinkage, Ltd
References: <mbtiv69qdxy.fsf@seven.ucs.indiana.edu> <kVGUECACX$ryEw9o@amster.demon.co.uk> <596s6k$ogp@rocannon.cam.harlequin.co.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 1996 13:25:06 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (WinNT; I)
Lines: 17

>>Seedy Dive
>>The smell of stale beer and piss is nearly overwhelming, and you
>
>Good grief, is that really the sort of language that is considered
>acceptable in a text adventure these days?

Why is it that a Latin derived word is okay but the equivalent English or
French derived word is profane? 'shit' == 'feces'/'defecate',
'piss' == 'urinate', 'fuck' == 'fornicate'/'coitus'. Medaeival
squeamishness wasn't successful at removing the old words for these things
from the common (== 'vulgar') language. If the concept is acceptable (and
it may not be, but that's a different issue), the choice of word shouldn't
matter much. Arguing about 'piss' vs. 'urinate', in a technical context
like this (as opposed to, e.g., 'piss off'), is mindless prudery.
-- 
David Tanguay       dat@Thinkage.on.ca       http://www.thinkage.on.ca/~dat/
Thinkage, Ltd.           Kitchener, Ontario, Canada          [43.24N 80.29W]
