On 8/10/24 7:08 PM, James Knott via talk wrote:

On 8/10/24 19:02, Peter King via talk wrote:

...

Thoughts? Experiences with gmail?

I don't recall email addresses ever being case sensitive and my experience goes back to a VAX 11/780 in the mid 80s.  I agree with your daughter, making it case sensitive would be a bad idea.  Is there an RFC that says otherwise? --- Post to this mailing list talk@gtalug.org Unsubscribe from this mailing list https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk

Don't know about a canonical RFC.  I could live without case sensitivity, but punctuation? -- Peter King peter.king@utoronto.ca Department of Philosophy 170 St. George Street #521 The University of Toronto (416)-978-3311 ofc Toronto, ON M5R 2M8 CANADA http://individual.utoronto.ca/pking/ ========================================================================= GPG keyID 0x7587EC42 (2B14 A355 46BC 2A16 D0BC 36F5 1FE6 D32A 7587 EC42) gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 7587EC42

Oh agreed. from a speech, quality screen reader standpoint, the punctuation provides a way for the synthesizer to simulate inflection. With question marks, exclamation points and so forth, even the most robotic voice can give a sense of human discourse. Kare On Sat, 10 Aug 2024, James Knott via talk wrote:

On 8/10/24 21:51, Peter King via talk wrote:

...

I could live without case sensitivity, but punctuation?

I agree with you on that.  I've seen some where there's not even any structure.  It's just run on words, if you can call them that. --- Post to this mailing list talk@gtalug.org Unsubscribe from this mailing list https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk

wow, I never knew that punctuation was ignored, so the period in one of my first email address is superfluous... Thanks for learning something today (well, yesterday) --Carey

On Sun, Aug 11, 2024 at 07:05:16AM -0500, CAREY SCHUG via talk wrote:

wow, I never knew that punctuation was ignored, so the period in one of my first email address is superfluous... Thanks for learning something today (well, yesterday)

It is up to the receiving system to decide if punctuation matters to it. To gmail it does not. It is apparently per smtp rules up to the receive to decide if the username is case sensitive. Of course any admin relying on that working is going to cause a lot of email to fail to be received, so most likely no one ever does that. -- Len Sorensen

On Sun, Aug 11, 2024 at 10:29:18PM -0400, Alvin Starr via talk wrote:

Just tested google mail since I have a google account with a clients domain. Not gmail technically.

Anyway. alvin.starr@domain.com works but alvinstarr@domain.com does not. but may gmail account will take alvinthing@gmail.com and alvinthing.@gmail.com

So it appears that punctuation counts some times.

Sure, google mail service for your domain does not follow the rules of gmail. It's not the same service. -- Len Sorensen

o1bigrenor is absolutely correct with his observation: "when I'm supposed to spend an hour of my time watching something that I could have read through in likely under 5 minutes - - - they're a waste of my time." A few paragraphs of well-crafted textual prose can be read and absorbed more quickly than the time it would take to watch a video conveying the same ideas. I often avoid watching lengthy videos, because the time investment is likely not justified by the video's information content. This being said, videos do have an important role to play on the Internet. For example, when a journalist interviews a prominent public figure, their conversation can range dynamically and spontaneously over subject matter. Tone of voice and facial expressions also convey information. The interviewer can confront the interviewee with difficult observations and questions. How the interviewee handles these challenges, will inform the audience about the character of the interviewee. Consider the urban riots in the United Kingdom. A video of a streetscape engulfed in rioting, has a more dramatic impact then the simple word "riot". And a video of UK Prime Minister Kier Starmer, conveys more powerfully, subtle aspects of his demenour and attitude, than would a written report. A written report could carry biased implications, whereas the video of Starmer is unvarnished uninterpreted Starmer. -------- Original Message -------- SUBJECT: Re: [GTALUG] Old and New Habits... DATE: 2024-08-11 07:31 FROM: o1bigtenor via talk <talk@gtalug.org> TO: GTALUG Talk <talk@gtalug.org> On Sat, Aug 10, 2024 at 8:51 PM Peter King via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:

On 8/10/24 7:08 PM, James Knott via talk wrote: On 8/10/24 19:02, Peter King via talk wrote: Thoughts? Experiences with gmail? I don't recall email addresses ever being case sensitive and my experience goes back to a VAX 11/780 in the mid 80s. I agree with your daughter, making it case sensitive would be a bad idea. Is there an RFC that says otherwise? --- Post to this mailing list talk@gtalug.org Unsubscribe from this mailing list https://can01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgtalug.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ftalk&data=05%7C02%7Cpeter.king%40utoronto.ca%7C6e7e5b7fccea433cefbe08dcb9914a41%7C78aac2262f034b4d9037b46d56c55210%7C0%7C0%7C638589280871237820%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=o8w5jyMVwN%2BfzHknjuZLP1ZDYRQ5VwkByVcZxiLhcXI%3D&reserved=0 [1]

Don't know about a canonical RFC. I could live without case sensitivity, but punctuation? I'm a thinking that poor use of case and a dearth of punctuation are actually small potatoes to what is happening out there in the wild. What I am seeing is that text has almost become discarded in favor of, wait - - - you'll love this - - - video. It is just so much easier to disseminate ideas if one can babble in from of some kind of video taking device than to actually write things. Agreed - - - poor or bad punctuation makes for difficult reading, lack of capitalization also doesn't help much but when I'm supposed to spend an hour of my time watching something that I could have read through in likely under 5 minutes - - - they're a waste of my time. (And that's not getting into the severe dearth of understanding of information that has been acquired in the past - - - we MUST repeat research at least every generation!! (NO!!!!!!) Its so research institutions remove access to research within 3 years of completion - - - because its 'old' - - - - ARGH!! end rant! --- Post to this mailing list talk@gtalug.org Unsubscribe from this mailing list https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk Links: ------ [1] https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk

*o1bigrenor* is *absolutely correct* with his observation: "when I'm supposed to spend an hour of my time watching something that I could have read through in likely under 5 minutes - - - they're a waste of my time."

A few paragraphs of well-crafted textual prose can be read and absorbed more quickly than the time it would take to watch a video conveying the same ideas. I often avoid watching lengthy videos, because the time investment is likely not justified by the video's information content.

This being said, videos do have an important role to play on the Internet. For example, when a journalist interviews a prominent public figure, their conversation can range dynamically and spontaneously over subject matter. Tone of voice and facial expressions also convey information. The interviewer can confront the interviewee with difficult observations and questions. How the interviewee handles these challenges, will inform the audience about the character of the interviewee.

Consider the urban riots in the United Kingdom. A video of a streetscape engulfed in rioting, has a more dramatic impact then the simple word "riot". And a video of UK Prime Minister Kier Starmer, conveys more powerfully, subtle aspects of his demenour and attitude, than would a written report. A written report could carry biased implications, whereas the video of Starmer is unvarnished uninterpreted Starmer.

I wasn't trying to suggest that videos had no place just that its become

On Sun, Aug 11, 2024 at 8:23 AM Steve Petrie via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote: the ubiquitous constant because the presenters are lazy (and imo likely not deserving of their Ph.D!). Regards

On Sat, Aug 10, 2024 at 7:17 PM Ron / BCLUG via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:

Peter King via talk wrote on 2024-08-10 16:02:

...

The discussion was inconclusive, to say the least, and I thought (and think!) that we should respect case and punctuation.

Generally, I agree.

Just today I subscribed to a podcast by someone who's podcast work I quite like, only to see that absolutely no capitalization is used on episode titles, even for proper nouns like "Boston".

FFS, I just might unsubscribe.

I hate this trend where it's "cool" to eschew capitalization, or even worse, to skip it at sentence beginnings, but use it in, say, "CPU".

WTF? It's worse than the old-timers writing all-caps back in the early '90s ("Stop shouting!")

...

But I certainly hadn't considered the arguments against it...

When it comes to email, it'd be a huge flaw to allow me to sign up as PeterKing@gmail.com when you've already got peterking@gmail.com

Email addresses are, as I understand it, folded to lower-case for handling and that makes sense.

...

Thoughts? Experiences with gmail? Reflections on generational differences in the approach to computing?

I've already ranted about lower-case everything, I'd best refrain from starting on about emoji, "LOL" as punctuation, etc. -- those aren't even generational. If anything, they're more popular amongst the oldsters.

rb --- Post to this mailing list talk@gtalug.org Unsubscribe from this mailing list https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk

Peter, don't you work in philosophy? I'm surprised you didn't mention vagueness as an issue here in the philosophy of language or go through lexical analysis with your daughters. The debate ends rather quickly, I would think with that. But my memory is incorrect about that, perhaps. Nick

Thanks for clearing that up. However, I'm pretty sure the debate is around this: 1. You seem to think proper names are rigid descriptors to be crude and email/domain names are under that Your daughters seem to buy into at least one of these: 1. Proper names are just short hand descriptions and not special in any way 2. Proper name descriptions are rigid but the rigidity does not have punctuation either lower/uppercase as part of its requirements 3. Email/Domain names are not a proper name by requirements for them I'm not much of an expert on the philosophy of language and you're out of date. However, this seems to be where the debate is going. I would gather figuring out which of those three is the issue may help. I could be misunderstanding through. Nick On Sat, Aug 10, 2024 at 9:55 PM Peter King via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:

On 8/10/24 7:55 PM, xerofoify via talk wrote:

...

On Sat, Aug 10, 2024 at 7:17 PM Ron / BCLUG via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:

Peter, don't you work in philosophy? I'm surprised you didn't mention vagueness as an issue here in the philosophy of language or go through lexical analysis with your daughters. The debate ends rather quickly, I would think with that. But my memory is incorrect about that, perhaps.

I do indeed work in philosophy. This could be a vagueness issue, though it is more likely to be an ambiguity issue (i.e. a spot where there are rules/norms/customs but in fact we don't converge on the same ones). Vagueness works for words like "large." Ambiguity for whether we should understand "bank" as the side of a river or a financial institution. My gut intuition is that this is more like the latter than the former.

Also, I try not to pull professional rank, especially when I might be wrong (or seriously out of date).

-- Peter King peter.king@utoronto.ca Department of Philosophy 170 St. George Street #521 The University of Toronto (416)-978-3311 ofc Toronto, ON M5R 2M8 CANADA

http://individual.utoronto.ca/pking/

========================================================================= GPG keyID 0x7587EC42 (2B14 A355 46BC 2A16 D0BC 36F5 1FE6 D32A 7587 EC42) gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 7587EC42

--- Post to this mailing list talk@gtalug.org Unsubscribe from this mailing list https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk

In practice, most places did not give out both George and george as local email accounts, so it just meant outsiders could address to george@company.com or George@company.com, but insiders HAD to use the correct capitalization or it would not go through. <pre>--Carey</pre>

On 08/10/2024 11:26 PM CDT CAREY SCHUG <sqrfolkdnc@comcast.net> wrote:

I remember in the early days when email was primarily in-house, that IBM's system (or maybe Cisco's) WAS case sensitive, that is, George was a different account than George. and georgE would match neither. I don't recall if or how that was resolved when the internet was added, I kind of think that you had an internal email and an external email, so only one of George or George got to use that on the internet email.

Does anybody remember if I am totally confused, right, or something close?

<pre>--Carey</pre>

D*mn autocorrect. I double checked, and when I sent it, my "George and george" were differently cased (though I had to go back and change the second one to lower case before sending). Don't know if the list serve changed it or if James' email changed it. At least some of my emails don't attempt to correct anything quoted. And it could have been an installation option whether to differentiate case or not, or changed from honoring to not honoring. -Carey

On 08/11/2024 9:20 AM CDT James Knott via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:

On 8/11/24 00:26, CAREY SCHUG via talk wrote:

...

I remember in the early days when email was primarily in-house, that IBM's system (or maybe Cisco's) WAS case sensitive, that is, George was a different account than George. and georgE would match neither. I don't recall if or how that was resolved when the internet was added, I kind of think that you had an internal email and an external email, so only one of George or George got to use that on the internet email.

Does anybody remember if I am totally confused, right, or something close?

I was at IBM in the late 90s, where I used both PROFS and Lotus Notes. I don't recall either being case sensitive. I have never used Cisco e-mail.

I also used to have a personal CompuServe account and Telenet¹ when I was at Unitel. IIRC, a CompuServe was two groups of numbers, separated by a comma. I've forgotten what the address format on Telenet was.

1. Unitel was the Canadian provider of Telenet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telenet --- Post to this mailing list talk@gtalug.org Unsubscribe from this mailing list https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk