W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2011

Re: [From-Origin] on "theft"

From: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 16:27:04 -0400
Message-ID: <CAKA+Ax=qxqM3T0JPOe7rMFbDi2K9hnpv7PWVLZptebTEUhQDzw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
Cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote:
> I would suggest not using the word "theft", even if placed in quotes. Call
> it bandwidth "leeching" or something like that. It certainly is by no means
> "theft" by any reasonable definition.

"Theft" is a broad term that can informally encompass pretty much any
activity that one person does to gain something at the expense of
others.  Like many words with strong connotations, it's very commonly
used when the speaker wishes to apply the word's connotations to other
things that they think are conceptually related to the point of
deserving those connotations.  Supposing that "theft" has the same
meaning as "stealing", which is what your dictionary definition says,
it's entirely unremarkable to speak of stealing ideas, stealing a
kiss, stealing the show, stealing a base, and so on.  The intent is to
emphasize the act's injustice, sneakiness, or unexpectedness.

However, I agree that there's no need to use loaded language here,
even in quotation marks.  "Bandwidth leeching" is probably neutral
enough.  If not, we could go with something even more neutral, like
"using others' bandwidth".
Received on Monday, 25 July 2011 20:28:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:46 GMT