<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 4/24/2019 10:58 AM, Daniel Dadap
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:16B14ACF-9CEA-4C44-837D-F28D57502D7C@dadap.net">
<blockquote type="cite" style="color: #000000;">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">On Apr 24, 2019, at 09:32, Lieven L. Litaer <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:levinius@gmx.de" moz-do-not-send="true"><levinius@gmx.de></a> wrote:
Although I sometimes have had weird and strong arguments and discussions
with SuStel, I am thankful for him sometimes being so strict on some
rules, and I agree with him here. Our first rule is "Canon = Okrand".
There really is no need to change that.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Is anybody disputing this?
The closest thing I can find is that De'vID is suggesting that we can consider Klingon that has been used on screen, but which is not Okrandian canon, to be a separate category to Klingon that is not Okrandian canon and has not been used on screen. That seems like a useful distinction to make for its own sake; what people choose to do with the different categories after making such a distinction is up to them. That he uses the word “canon” in the names of categories that are something other than proper Okrandian canon might be a little confusing and perhaps controversial, but I really don’t think he’s disputing that Okrand is the sole source of Okrandian canon.</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>What he's disputing is what determines "correct" Klingon. If he
just wants to label a new category that combines what Okrand says
with what <i>Discovery</i> says, that's just a label, no problem.
He just needs a better name than Okrandian Klingon canon, as it's
not obvious at first glance how it differs from Okrandian canon.<br>
</p>
<p>But he's not just advocating for a new category. He's arguing
Okrand's retirement and ratios of on-screen Klingon to written
Klingon. He's talking about people who "adhere strictly only to
Klingon which comes from Okrand as canon" which is, I believe, a
straw-man argument, since the real issue is identifying what's
"correct" Klingon, not enforcing correct Klingon.</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
SuStel
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://trimboli.name">http://trimboli.name</a></pre>
</body>
</html>