Return-Path: <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id f9MK9U022569; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 16:09:30 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 16:09:30 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <16e.2bac345.2905d684@aol.com> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: JayHGroves@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:1857] Re: What does a transparent approach mean? X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Status: O Content-Length: 546 Lines: 8 Rona: I'm not sure where the reference is made referring to EFF being or using a "transparent" approach. I believe, however, that the person referencing this term has misused it in this context. While it may be true that the word, transparent's literal meaning conjures ideas such as "clear", "easy to understand", etc., it is figurative meaning is not a positive attribute. It generally refers to concepts which lack substance or depth. Within the context of the latter definition, EFF is, indeed, not "transparent". Joe DiSalvo Delaware
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Apr 09 2002 - 13:30:21 EDT