BE ch 5 nerd wars

[David Morris]

Oh!  Jose has taken up Jochen’s cause!  So, hey Joe, you say that this
 “how” makes the quote “quite different?”  OK.  Well, so, hey Joe…. *HOW?*

Oh. But you “don’t want to pursue it.”  OK.

Funny, though, you and Jochen both catching that errant “how.”…   But also
funny that, just now before your answer here, Jochen was pursuing it
offlist with me, and he said, scoldingly:

“It's the how [me: no quotes], David, that should jump into your face when
you finally open the book onto page 713. And I hope you and Mark would make
your excuses. And never again copy and paste without looking into the book
or better: transcribe from the book.

I'll never understand why you didn't do so in the 1st place.”

And (still not understanding his answer) this was my response to Jochen:

“Is this a court of law?  Is there a typo?  a transposed word or two?  Are
we discussing the Talmud?  The Torah?  Is this a DNA match test to condemn
or save a life from Death Row?

[…]

Out of the approximately 80 words in my quote, how many words are different
from the text you take as gospel?  *Do those differences change the meaning
conveyed at all?  If so, how so?*  Will angels dance differently on the
heads of those word switches?

But, hey Joe, you don’t read my emails, do you?

David Morris

On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 12:34 PM Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:

> The actual quote is different.  At the very end  of the quoted segment it
> goes
>
>  …." We need that.  And how they know it- “ how often …..
>
> Limited interest in this argument and so don’t want to pusue how the word
> ‘how' might make a difference, or the dash to continue the thought instead
> of a period after ‘it'. But there is a slight misquote. Don’t know if that
> is Jochen’s point or not.