> Speeding wrote:
>>> If the e-book is "FREE", why the use of the words "BUY" and "REFUND"
>>> ?
>>>
>>
>> Perhaps that's the same meaning as the "free" for Fast Seduction,
>> regarding the freedom to post there? Why are you asking me about
>> someone else's definition of a word.
>
> I'm wondering why you seem so eager to defend it.
Defend what? The site that offers a "free" download. Or the site that claim to be
"completely free"?
> However, it appears that the e-book may have originally been available
> on a "pay first" basis, and while the offer has now changed, the web
> pages haven't been updated to reflect the new situation.
>
> However, I did have to create a throwaway e-mail account to discover
> that. So, by the definition you apply to a certain other website, it
> wasn't actually "free".
No real disagreement. Of course, to be a more correct analogy, you'd have to say that
after you go the download, there was a rider attached to it that states you will have to
remain a member in good standing to be able to continue to read the download, and that if
your standing is ever revoked that the download will be deleted. And that the information
in the download can be changed at any time orremoved at any time without your permission,
and that all rights to the download are retined by the website. And that any useage of the
download must agknowledge the website as the reason for your success....
Then, yes, we'd both, perhaps, say it's not actually "free".
>> I refer to a dictonary when I want to find a defintion for a word.
>
> Excuse me while I replace my irony meter.
No problem. You probably busted it because you didn't know what Irony means. Excuse me
while I refer to a dictonary to explain it to you...
pretense of ignorance and of willingness to learn from another assumed in order to make
the other's false conceptions conspicuous by adroit questioning
the use of words to express something other than and especially the opposite of the
literal meaning
incongruity between the actual result of a sequence of events and the normal or expected
result
Of course, pretense of ignorance isn't quite accurate for you, is it. You wouldn't want to
be accused of using a dictonary when you have a faith to rely on.
> Hey, according to at least a few poters on ASF
>> "free" is a very flexible word. Even when it's quoted as "completely
>> free".
>
> erm...
> possibly most a.s.f. posters seem to assume "free" to mean
> "not requiring payment"... because that is also the meaning
> assumed by most native speakers of colloquial English ?
No. Especially not when the quote is "completely free".
> We can argue that is incorrect, when using a stricter definition.
> And, ironically enough, *I* would actually agree that Formhandle's
> chosen wording could be tightened up somewhat.
Bang. Another Irony meter bites the dust.
Well, we could argue when using a stricter definition, but that would require uing a
definition in the first place. And since the word "free", especially "completely free"
already HAS a definition, arguing about the definition is moot. The only question left
then is what you wish to use as a substitute definition, since you don't like the taste of
the actual definition.
And yes, I agree with you that "completely free" could be "tighted up" somewhat. Or
rather, I'd say it's completely inaccurate. I'd say the site requires a membership that is
available on a costfree basis. But certainly not that the website is free to access. And
that was the claim. Actually, I took offense first becaue the claim was "the website is
completely free to access."
> But said wording reflects what we might call the "real-world" usage of
> English. Thus, it seems a bit disingenuous to excoriate one website
> for using colloquial English, while not saying nothing about any of
> the several million others that do likewise...
True enough. I'd be hesitant to claim anywebsite that requires membership to view is
truely "free". After all, the fact that there is a requirement to view it means it's not
actually free to be viewed... just as I'd hesitate to say the download you got was "free".
It wasn't. It merely didn't cost you anything. But it certainly was not actually FREE. It
had strings attached.
Then again, I live in a country that has a bit of a schtick about being "free".
> Sigh
> Now I'll probably be accused of being a Cylon... or a Ferrengi...
Only if you act like a robot will you be accused of being one. So far, you've done just
the opposite, in this post. You readily disagreed with the party line and even went so far
as to say that you think the "chosen wording could be tightened up a bit". When I said the
same thing... only more forcefully... that saying "the website is completely free to
access" is a bullshit claim... well, here we are now... and now you are apparently
agreeing.
--
You could be a Cylon and not even know it...
