At Christmas they put white lights on all of the trees except for Pete Conrad's which gets red lights. At his funeral his crew mate Alan Beam said "Pete says that while he was here he was always the shortest astronaut, but he doesn't want his tree to be the smallest tree. Pete wants his tree to be special the most colorful tree because his motto is, When you can't be good, be colorful."
I also think it would be respectful to the women who died in the space programmes to edit "his life" to "their life".
These are the first groups that came to mind. They may not all seem applicable all of the time but I would argue that making your site accessible to as many of these people as possible would improve the experience of all of your users.
- Partially sighted users that are not technically literate enough to use assistive technologies.
- People with physical impairments that affect their ability to use input devices and may also dictate the types of device they can use.
- People with low levels of technical literacy.
- People with poor literacy in the language of the site.
- People with dyslexia, not forgetting those with poor working memory or slow processing speed.
- People with dementia.
- People with a host of other mental and cognitive disorders.
According to [1] it's W xor X. Interpreting that literally suggests that read only memory is disallowed as well. I'd be surprised if that's actually the case.
I don't think that's particularly wishful thinking, however, your alternative phrasing could be seen as equally, if not more, leading.
When quizzed on the behaviour of a C program I would expect a careful and experienced C programmer to consider the behaviour described by the standard (which standard?); unspecified and implementation defined behaviours; and deviations from the standard in both the compiler and the environment. Often I'd expect the answer to be "it depends".
I think, once you unanimously conclude that something should not be done, that people don't really care _why_ it shouldn't be done until someone tries to suggest you should do it.
For example, we know not to dereference null pointers. It is pretty much never correct to do so, and it's hard to imagine otherwise. What does it matter what C says should happen when you do it? You're never going to intentionally do it, so it becomes an incongruous hypothetical. Like "what would happen if you were never born?" The answer is useless because the question is inherently flawed.
If you're that worried why not cut it short to "We liked your attitude, you seem intelligent, and well-spoken, but we have concerns about your knowledge of <some key area>." There can't be any risk there, surely?
When I first read that, I assumed he was teaching the class. But after checking Wikipedia I found that he received his bachelor of science degree in 1960. Now I'm astonished.
I also think it would be respectful to the women who died in the space programmes to edit "his life" to "their life".