Diskussion:Forskningsavdelningen

aus Metalab, dem offenen Zentrum für meta-disziplinäre Magier und technisch-kreative Enthusiasten.
Wechseln zu: Navigation, Suche

Police Sources

Police sources claim that they acted on suspicion of preparations for hacking and theft ...

Which sources? — Nex 15:39, 2. Dez. 2009 (CET)

I hope there will be a translated version of the polise.se post soon. — Philip

If not, I think we should at least add a footnote with a link to the original. — Nex 15:39, 2. Dez. 2009 (CET)

I inserted the original, the etherpad version I sent to the list will be put onto a webpage soon I guess. We'll just add it as it comes up. --Philip 15:42, 2. Dez. 2009 (CET)

Wide recognition of the Metalab

Our organisation is privately financed as well as publicly subsidised and has been host to widely recognised talks, conferences, workshops, and social events.

Widely recognised by whom? — Nex 15:39, 2. Dez. 2009 (CET)

Is supported by the Pressespiegel. — Philip

Perfect answer. I replaced the 'FIXME' comment with the relevant link. Maybe we should change all such links to Footnotes that include plain URLs once we're done editing, so the links will still work on a print-out. But since this is not the only occurrence of an in-line link, for now I left it as is. — Nex 15:39, 2. Dez. 2009 (CET)

Gun nuts

Participation in this sport is no more a preparation for burglary than sport shooting is a preparation for murder.

Would we like to change this to a different example in order to steer clear of people misinterpreting the preceding sentence as an endorsement of gun nuts? Do we want to have the word "murder" in this document? — Nex 15:39, 2. Dez. 2009 (CET)

No, this is not a reference to "gun nuts" - shooting exercises generally are a sport, I know such people, those are not "gun nuts". And the word murder is there to make a point. There is an english saying "to get away with murder" too, so this shouldn't be of any concern. — Philip

I know it's not a reference to gun nuts; this statement doesn't explain why people won't interpret the passage in a way we didn't intend. N.B. I don't want to change this part, I just wasn't entirely sure and wanted another opinion. — Nex 15:39, 2. Dez. 2009 (CET)

To us it might read as gun nuts, to the guys at the other ends of the politcal spectrum (who should be our prime target) it hopefully reads as common sense. If anyone comes up with good, sharp comments/metaphors of a different kind, go ahead! But I really don't think it is misleading in any way. We could probably correct it to "crossbow training" or "ownership of a gun"  :) --Philip 15:45, 2. Dez. 2009 (CET)