4 ms·
Really? Must we use the 'gate' suffix? Could we possibly put an end to this practice?
by TamDenholm 16y ago
Really? Must we use the 'gate' suffix? Could we possibly put an end to this practice?
- hugh3 16y agoI agree, it's a terrible suffix, completely overplayed, and... let's face it, most of the news-consuming audience is too young to remember Watergate anyway.
- gwern 16y agoWhat suffix will we use then?
- protomyth 16y agoHow about none. Just use words plainly and skip cuteness.
- gwern 16y agoI'll rephrase my original question, since apparently you didn't understand it as evidenced by you not supplying any concise name. What's the plain words for this?
- pronoiac 16y agoUsually leak & scandal work.
- protomyth 16y agoI'll also rephrase and say I think the current trend of giving a concise name / label to everything is contributing to the soundbite mentality. This is the "Wikileaks of US State Dept cables". From there, you can keep referring to the "cables" for short. I'll concede that labels makes it easier for search engines, but I am not convinced that that is a good thing.
- cypherpunks01 16y ago"leak" is a pretty popular suffix for these kinds of things.
- Natsu 16y agoThe only ways to stop a practice like that are to supplant it with a more popular word or suffix (which will someday annoy someone else), or to have the world go long enough without a scandal they use it to describe that it fades from use and memory. Good luck.