DEVONthink 3 Public Beta Now Open

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?