And Yet More on the Proposed Code of Conduct:
Frank J
rolls his own.
Via Cal Tech Girl
(That was a Google-bomb, BTW: I don't like "CalTech Girl." I want it to be "Cal Tech Girl." Who cares how she actually wants it to appear?—she's a scientist, and she should leave these delicate issues to a competent editor. Like, um . . . me.
From now on, please link her as Cal Tech Girl. Cal Tech should be two words.)
UPDATE: I've been vetoed! Apparently, Pasadena houses the California Institute of technology. Who knew?
But someone ought to tell the CS Department, nicht?
I have been given special dispensation to use "Dudette from the Land of the Nerds," but it's small consolation, really.
Apparently, things are almost as bad at the website for the Massachusetts Institute of technology, since in display type they use "mit," and in plain text it's MIT. Of course, at no point is it styled "MIt," which would be the equivalent of "Caltech."
Not that I'm an embittered English major who never gets her way, and has never truly accepted that it's The New York Times, but Los Angeles Times (no article required). Or why I once worked (I kid you not) at Hunting Magazine. (Why the capital "M," if the word Magazine isn't part of the name?)
Goodnight; I'm off to consume huge quantities of gin.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
01:42 PM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 240 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Actually, NO. It's actually Caltechgirl.
Caltech is ONE WORD. Really. And the T is NEVER capitalized.
Check my blog. I NEVER capitalize the T.
If it was multiple words it would be Cal Inst Tech, since the full name is California Institute of Technology.
Just one of my pet peeves.
Posted by: caltechgirl at April 10, 2007 05:13 PM (r0kgl)
2
Hm. Okay. Let's think this through.
Normally, the way a phrase evolves goes like this: two words, hyphenated compound, and then run together. For instance, 15 years ago I was a copy editor, and now in publishing circles I call myself a copyeditor.
And I used to e-mail people, but now I generally email them.
So perhaps after years of Cal Tech, it became Caltech (though I could see an argument for CalTech; I'm hoping Cal-Tech was skipped, due to its being egregiously ugly--though it probably was used adjectivally). However, there's no rule that dictates that the nickname would have to be Cal Inst Tech. For one thing, there are many ways of abbreviating California. For another, nicknames are weird: how did Robert beome Bob? How did William become Bill? The idea that all shortening of names follows the same pattern is incorrect.
Of course, if you feel that strongly, I can certainly call you Caltechgirl. Except on those occasions when you decide to take the wrong side of an issue, when I would find myself "accidentally" breaking the name.
Are you sure about this, though? After all, Caltech (yeech) modifies "girl." I still think there should be at least one break in there: it's a bit of a mouthful this way. Also, it's a proper noun. You want more capital letters. They make a name look more namelike.
Posted by: Attila Girl at April 10, 2007 08:16 PM (uSWaZ)
3
Well, Caltech is the preferred name that everyone on campus uses.... CalTech is right out. It is however, Tech if used with out the "Cal" Modifier.... Also previously referred to as the "Big T"....
I'll go for Caltech Girl. That's acceptable. Just not CalTech Girl. Or Cal Tech Girl Or Caltech Gal.
Interesting, the Firefox dictionary recognizes Caltech, but not CalTech...
Posted by: caltechgirl at April 10, 2007 08:22 PM (r0kgl)
4
CITeGirl
No thanks necessary. . .
Posted by: Darrell at April 10, 2007 08:26 PM (QEkk2)
5
How about "Tech Chick from Oldmoneyville"?
or "Biology Maven from Gambletown"?
or "The Microscope Mistress from The Land of the Roses"?
Whaaaaaat? Too wordy?
Posted by: Attila Girl at April 10, 2007 08:51 PM (uSWaZ)
6
...btw, it's "California Institute of (capital T) Technology."
8-O
Posted by: leelu at April 11, 2007 08:45 PM (KFuCy)
7
Leelu! You missed the joke. I'm surprised at you.
Let's not fall asleep at the switch again.
Posted by: Attila Girl at April 11, 2007 10:59 PM (6C0F9)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
28kb generated in CPU 2.8234, elapsed 2.7427 seconds.
209 queries taking 2.6224 seconds, 464 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
