PuppyThis forum is for the discussion of Puppy Linux.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
To me, "ignorant" implies a willful disregard for knowledge, while "uninformed" is just that, uninformed. See the term "ignorance" in the same dictionary you referenced, Sepero.
ig·no·rance Pronunciation (gnr-ns)
n.
The condition of being uneducated, unaware, or uninformed.
I'm not trying to be the grammar police, but it mentions nothing of willful intent. If an average child of 5 years old hasn't had the training to know their ABC's, then they are ignorant, irregardless of intent. If you think ignorant or ignorance is something else, perhaps you should write your own dictionary. (ok, slight sarcasm there)
Distribution: multi booting whatever I feel like. Grub rocks!
Posts: 85
Original Poster
Rep:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sepero
ig·no·rance Pronunciation (gnr-ns)
n.
The condition of being uneducated, unaware, or uninformed.
I'm not trying to be the grammar police, but it mentions nothing of willful intent. If an average child of 5 years old hasn't had the training to know their ABC's, then they are ignorant, irregardless of intent. If you think ignorant or ignorance is something else, perhaps you should write your own dictionary. (ok, slight sarcasm there)
i can not understand where these viewpoints are coming from. i should be sad that my software reached a brand new audience without me having to do any of the leg work? my software was worth a publishing firm mass producing discs with my own code on it. the more you expand on how you percieve this situation the more unfeasible it seems. If the linux world worked the way you want it to people would spend all day thanking each other and never get anything done. you have to base your expectations in a real world that includes corporate business, LUG's and everything inbetween. everything you're saying is generally positive and admirable but it needs to be heavily reigned back when the real world comes into play.
Unfortunately Chris is right. In real world you do not actually wait for people to thankyou everytime. It is simply a waste of time. The one's who appericiate do so willingly and there's really no time to brood over the one's who didn't. In the Linux world it is even more true.
I'm not trying to be the grammar police, but it mentions nothing of willful intent. If an average child of 5 years old hasn't had the training to know their ABC's, then they are ignorant, irregardless of intent.
since we're on a bit of a grammar theme:
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefreedictionary.com
ir·re·gard·less
adv. Nonstandard
Regardless.
[Probably blend of irrespective and regardless.]
Usage Note: Irregardless is a word that many mistakenly believe to be correct usage in formal style, when in fact it is used chiefly in nonstandard speech or casual writing. Coined in the United States in the early 20th century, it has met with a blizzard of condemnation for being an improper yoking of irrespective and regardless and for the logical absurdity of combining the negative ir- prefix and -less suffix in a single term. Although one might reasonably argue that it is no different from words with redundant affixes like debone and unravel, it has been considered a blunder for decades and will probably continue to be so.
Let's all agree to get along, OK? It would be nice if everyone was acknowledged as they deserved, I'm sure we all agree. But (a) there's not much people here at linuxquestions can do about what happens on ebay (even if it were justified) and (b) arguing among ourselves doesn't take Puppy forward. So rather than distract Barry with trademark questions, test out the latest release and file your bug reports - or even better, your bugfixes!
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
