Forum Posts Feed
DEVONthink 3 Public Beta Now Open
< Next Topic | Back to topic list | Previous Topic >
Pages: ‹ First < 4 5 6 7 8 9 >
Posted by Paul Korm
Apr 30, 2019 at 08:19 AM
Good analyses, @NickG and @Skywatcher.
Maybe the motive is simply “since any grifter can claim religiosity, we’ll just have to say no to all of them”. Makes economic sense.
Posted by MadaboutDana
Apr 30, 2019 at 09:52 AM
Well, I would agree, except these are properly registered charities. So they have already been vetted, at least in principle, for their own “discriminatory” behaviour. So DT could reasonably be described as discriminatory.
However, I think this discussion, interesting though it is, is distracting us with semantics. Grounds for a detailed analysis, but not for a casual discussion, perhaps?
Posted by J J Weimer
Apr 30, 2019 at 01:04 PM
The original post makes a claim of discrimination, eventually supporting its negative “discriminatory” as opposed to “discriminating” in followups. Here we are debating the meaning when I believe instead we should ask whether any effort was made ask why the charity is not recognized. What is officially vetted in the US is not necessarily officially vetted elsewhere and vica versa. Finally, absent proof otherwise, Hanlon’s razor should apply foremost.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor
In summary, I take the OP’s underlying tone that Devonthink is being maliciously discriminatory (which is a bad thing) as opposed to being discriminating (which is permitted and reasonable) or inadvertently ignorant (Hanlon’s razor) as a bark without any teeth.
MadaboutDana wrote:
Well, I would agree, except these are properly registered charities. So
>they have already been vetted, at least in principle, for their own
>“discriminatory” behaviour. So DT could reasonably be described as
>discriminatory.
>
>However, I think this discussion, interesting though it is, is
>distracting us with semantics. Grounds for a detailed analysis, but not
>for a casual discussion, perhaps?
Posted by apb123
May 18, 2019 at 08:23 AM
This is unfair. I think you are reading too much into this. They have no hidden agenda they are just a software company.
Posted by Hugh
May 18, 2019 at 08:41 AM
I lack the information necessary to take a view on this discussion. I will only say that in my own limited email communications with the developers they have been polite, straightforward and responsive.