Circuit of The Americas today announced that it has been declared ready to host the 2012 F1 United States GP by Charlie Whiting, who directs racing, safety and technical matters for the FIA. Whiting visited the Central Texas racing circuit as part of a scheduled pre-race inspection and approved the circuit for “Grade 1” status, hence appropriate to host an F1 race.
I beg to differ as I find the argument over nuances important here. MrM found the quote above scribbled on a piece of rock quite some time ago, why it should take precedence over more recent xpressions, thus equalizing the latter two in relevance?Pup wrote:A complete misstating of the rule in question.xpensive wrote:Should or shall, perhaps its time for another clarification, "Thou shalt not bring the sport into disrepute", what's that then?
In English, the word should means it's a suggestion. Shall means you will do something because you are told you will do it. You don't need any court interpretations or evidence other than a dictionary you can buy at a gas station. There's your clarification.xpensive wrote:Should or shall, perhaps it's time for another clarification, "Thou shalt not bring the sport into disrepute", what's that then?
You should eat the Nomenx."Shall" derives from the Old English "sceal" meaning "must". "Should" is the past simple and conditional (and therefore less direct and harsh) form of "shall", just as "would" is the past simple and conditional form of "will". In this sense, both "shall" and "should" maintain this meaning and usage (which is not typically interchangeable with "would", and slightly more interchangeable with "will") even in modern times and are in fact the most common way to express such obligations. Should is used with a sense of quasi-obligation, synonymous with ought to:
Realizing my mistake (Mr. Todt is not a technical delegate) I then contacted Jo Bauer, the Formula 1 Technical Delegate who was responsible for the Red Bull engine map clarification coming to pass. His comment was this...Jean Todt wrote:What in nine flaming hells are you talking about?
Mr. Bauer then forwarded my request for clarification to one Robert Darbelnet, current US-based FIA committee member. He said this...Jo Bauer wrote:Clearly there is a situation where there is a clear disconnect between a clear definition of shall and should. Clearly this requires a level of pedantry above my clear standing. Clearly my only recommendation is to refer this to the FIA for a more clear clarification.
I think this brings a conclusion to the question of the FIA's stance on this particular issue.Robert Darbelnet wrote:Get the mustard.
Welcome to Texas, F1 - you're no match for the Rich Bitch Army of the Junior League. Oh, but we know who you are...Pup wrote:
