I am so tired of seeing that acronym used in print. Has it become a new tool for unimaginative people to bandy about; a ploy such as that used by the egotistical when they use name dropping? An educated society demeans its vocabulary training, communication skills and the ability to convey thoughts when resorting to the use of profanity in any form to get attention. Learn how to show your outrage in a different manner or grow up.

Sandy, that's a double edged sword. If you don't like whats being said...DON'T READ IT! Quit trying to force your morality on other readers! It was in the title so you should have just stopped there...but NOOOoo! You're the one that needs to grow up!

Jim was right about you, 'Stuffy D'...Why don't YOU just STFU!!!

I didn't see any profanity. For that mattter, i didn't see an acronymn. Acronymns must be an abberviation that looks/sounds like a word.

But enough english lessons, if you're offended by WTF, do you also get offended when someone says dog gonnit, shoot, heck or darn? All of those are substitutes for supposedly profane words. And lets' not forget that 21st century profanity, "frac." Do you get offended when you see a cartoon that has $%@#!

If so, then you are indeed an OSP. If not, you're rather inconsistent.

Finally, while I might agree that WTF was used to grab attention (which is, in fact, exactly what a headline is supposed to do) it doesn't convey outrage.

However, I did find a good example of outrage, which I've quoted below:

am so tired of seeing that acronym used in print. Has it become a new tool for unimaginative people to bandy about; a ploy such as that used by the egotistical when they use name dropping? An educated society demeans its vocabulary training, communication skills and the ability to convey thoughts when resorting to the use of profanity in any form to get attention. Learn how to show your outrage in a different manner or grow up.
Sandy D


Now that author seems outraged.

Sandy you are right on target with your comment. There is no reason for profanity in modern journalism. The others that have commented are simply wanting to drag our whole society down into the gutter rather than raising a higher standard. Whether or not you trust in The Bible it says "Righteousness exalts a nation and sin is a reproach to any people". I want to live in a nation that raises the watermark so thanks for standing up for what is good and right.

Paul

Sandy and Paul, both of you are complete tools, stop complaining....seriously grow up, a journalist is supposed to be imaginative the title of this article captures peoples attention, nothing more

I do understand how people can be upset by using profanity (even the allusion of profanity) in professional journalism. Even if it isn't offensive to some people, overuse dulls the value of these words. If it's no longer shocking, what's the use of it?

However, in this context, it does apply in the fact the Apache is a web server, and WTF has only come about because of the web.

Professional journalists should always use the official language, not street talk, slang, or abbrevations for profanity. They live by writing and should respect their readers.

Problem is, a new generation has grown up using Internet and SMS, and they have gotten used to another language - totally uninterested in the official language. Then, after long use, they can't stop using the gutter-talk in writing even if they want to.

I'm not american. Here in Norway this phenomenon is even more visible in journalism than in english/american articles. Yes, the langauge goes down the drain together with the society, and few people care.

Why take a job as a journalist, when you don't care about the language? Just for the money? I pity you.

WTF is indeed an acronym.

ac·ro·nym (kr-nm)
n.
A word formed from the initial letters of a name, such as WAC for Women's Army Corps, or by combining initial letters or parts of a series of words, such as radar for radio detecting and ranging.

As has been mentioned, "WTF" is not an acronym. Sys Admin offered this (emphasis mine):

ac·ro·nym (kr-nm)
n.
A **WORD** formed from the initial letters of a name, such as WAC for Women's Army Corps, or by combining initial letters or parts of a series of words, such as radar for radio detecting and ranging.

WTF is an initialism, not an acronym, becuase WTF does not form a word. NASA is an acronym because we pronounce it as a whole word. We don't just say the letters N-A-S-A. POTUS is also an acronym, but POV is an initialism. Now, on to Sandy and Paul.

Sandy, Paul, do you find that the TG Daily Journalists are consistently profane? Although "WTF" is certainly not profane, let's pretend for a moment that it is. In that case, I believe that the journalist in question has used this profanity in a genius fashion. You see, it is the rarity and shock-value of the title which demonstrate to us just how surprising the enclosed news should be! This is not a lack of creativity, this is an extremely creative way of communicating surprise so deep that the journalist's normal loquaciousness has been supplanted by raw shock; and, honestly, good communication is what makes a good journalist. As long as this sort of title is a once-in-a-while occurrence, it makes its point perfectly.

Paul, do you really want to go to the bible for "righteousness"? So do you impregnate your daughters or throw them to the angry mob to be gang-raped to death? Do you burn your own son or daughter on an alter? Don't bring us the bible. If you have a problem with a certain type of language, just tell us why. Most of us aren't dumb enough to refer to that vile smut for morality, and you will not make your point.

how can you guys be offened by WTF?

here's an acronym for you guys ... LOOSER

ohh wait thats not an acronym :/

This discussion highlights an interesting clash of reader expectations caused by the growing gap between more formalized old school journalism and a more casual (what I will correctly or not call "banter") web/blog/SMS style. While I admit that I was orignally annoyed by the silliness of WTF being in the title, it is actually useful in that it identifies the article as being of the newer style. It is hard to separate casual news from more in depth analysis, which is my real frustration when seeking news on the web.

Give Cheung a break, he is being clear on his style upfront - you can't ask for more in these days of info overload.

I'm not offended or even bothered by the use of WTF in the title... Attention grabber, and obviously it worked.... but I can see how one would consider it somewhat unprofessional. Oh, and plus one to Dadga, absolutely correct.

I am not certain how much background anyone has who reads finds out this kind of news, but it is no surprise that Microsoft was thoughtful in putting money into Apache.
When executed properly, Microsoft giving money to its competition is WAY cheaper than going to court and fighting claims of monopoly (as if IIS is a true threat.)
If you look back in time, Jobs had Gates seeded Apple with $10Milion when Jobs returned. This was a win for Apple and Microsoft who was facing pressure in court to be a monopoly.
Frankly, I wonder if these IIS figures is mostly because people who run Windows Servers on the Internet (for corporate intranet access) is being added to the figure - like Remote Web Workplace.. which is MUCH different than those running professional marketing or eCommerce web sites.