[All Lists] [By Thread] [By Date] [Previous] [Next]
From: R. Nachmani
Subject: The Bx code
Date: 10 Sivan 5781
This is the paradox in practical form. In my community, we faced similar questions about what to record and what to leave unsaid. The community records noted births, deaths, marriages. They did not note conversions. This was deliberate. But the absence was itself noticeable to anyone who looked.
Devorah's three options are all bad. If you explain Bx, you teach users to make inferences. If you do not explain Bx, users will wonder what it means. If you explain it neutrally, the neutrality itself is suspicious.
Actually, this is similar to the three-valued logic discussion in the ZMAN thread. There, we struggled with what absence means. An indicator can be present, absent, or unstated. We decided that absence means "not applicable" while unstated means "unknown or unspecified."
Here we have a similar structure. B can be stated (BJ, BC), declined (Bx), or omitted entirely. Three values again.
But there is a crucial difference. In ZMAN, the absence of an indicator tells you nothing about the person's observance. You cannot infer from silence. Here, the presence of Bx tells you something: that there is something to decline. The code announces its own concealment.
We have built a system where silence speaks.
Thread: