= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Vladimir_Nesov comments on Woo! - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (57)
Actually, "woo" was "taken" before the year 1050:
"to seek to persuade (a person, group, etc.)..."
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/woo
The fact that my usage is consistent with that I think is quite reasonable. Most people outside of the skeptics community aren't actually familiar with the usage of the term "woo" that you're referring too. Nonetheless, I obviously see your point here. It would be preferable if there was no usage-confusion - especially since the skeptics community is really important to me. Does anyone have an alternative suggestion?
This fact is irrelevant. Only what people read in it these days matters. (History might affect present perception, but this is an indirect effect that is only visible through the effect on present perception.)
That is still present usage. I'd bet real money on finding more news headlines with "woo" in the sense of courting than in the other, more recent acceptation.
I do think the term will not serve Ben, but more due to context.