Theos-Talk Archives (December 2006 Message tt00302)

Mr. Aveline writes:

=====================================================
You say the ULT has a "general Registrar", and give a few other 
examples.

But these are informal functions, or "informal officers", if you 
prefer.

The ULT being no incorporated society, it has no officers in fact.

I believe this is an easy thing to understand.
=====================================================

Now I believe this statement above by Mr. Aveline is a good
example of ULTese - which involves redefining the meaning of
many common words.

The title of Mr. Aveline's post is:    NO OFFICERS, INDEED but then 
he seemingly admits that, well, they might be "informal officers".

Then Mr. Aveline goes on to say that the "ULT being no incorporated 
society, it has no officers in fact."

This comment appears to say that because the ULT is not 
incorporated, it has no officers.  But there are many organizations 
that are not incorporated and still have officers.

Look at some of the meanings of the word "office" and "officer" in 
the dictionary:

office:  "a position of responsibility or some degree of executive 
authority"

officer:  "one who holds an office of trust, authority, or command"

Surely in the recent posts from Carl Ek, one can see that 
the "Secretary General" and "secretary" of the ULT are "officers" 
that hold certain "offices".  Incorporated or not, doesn't matter! 

But the positions are redefined and in Mr. Aveline's ULTese are 
now:  "informal officers"

Why this apparent attempt by Mr. Aveline and other ULT 
members (sorry I meant associates!!) to redefine these words and 
other words such as "society", "propaganda", etc.?  See my previous 
post "To Carl Ek: What is a society & what is propaganda???" at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/38185

This redefining of words I think is part of the pattern that leads 
persons like Tillett to exclaim:

It's like trying to gather up quicksilver!

Daniel