4 ms·
You’re right, but that’s a distraction from the bigger misconception — it’s actually “Read Herring”. The idea is that the herring has already been documented (
by pinkmuffinere 4mo ago
You’re right, but that’s a distraction from the bigger misconception — it’s actually “Read Herring”. The idea is that the herring has already been documented (and “read” back), no longer deserving of additional discussion.
- blacksmith_tb 4mo agoI have never heard that suggestion... if you can document it, the wiki entry would need an update[1] 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring#History
- pinkmuffinere 4mo agoI can’t tell if you’re serious, but my definition was certainly not, lol. My claim was that correcting “red haring” to “red herring” distracts from a bigger misunderstanding (thus making the correction itself a red herring! Please laugh.) I completely made up my claim about the true meaning. For better or worse, my brain finds that humorous. Edit: i am honored that you found my origin story believable enough for serious consideration.