On 3 Apr 2003, at 4:13, Ernst Lippe wrote: > On Wed, 02 Apr 2003 16:05:52 -0800 > Jeshua Lacock <jeshua@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wednesday, April 2, 2003, at 03:41 PM, Kevin Myers wrote: > > > > > Personally I don't think that it sounds too bad at all, especially > > > considering the lack of other decent alternatives suggested so > > > far... > > > > I think the average American will think it was translated funky and > > assume it is the work of an amateur. Of course, this is just my > > humble opinion. > > But it is the work of an amateur, up till now nobody has > offered me any payment for it. Perhaps you two are using different meanings for 'amateur': one being 'unpaid', the other 'low-quality'. Of course, in the old days, amateur meant 'noble', 'high-quality', because an amateur was something who did not need to do something for a living. The word 'amateur' had a similar meaning that 'hacker' does among hackers. -- branko collin collin@xxxxxxxxx
