And vs. Or

"Discussed, corresponded, and/or otherwise communicated …"

I have seen both "and" and "or" used preceding the word "otherwise" in such sentences.

Without getting off-topic as to whether so many verbs are needed anyway, may I get some advice as to which ("and or "or") makes the most sense logically, grammatically, and aesthetically?

At first I thought it depends whether, within the scope of what I'm are talking about, all those things happened or just one.

But I'm saying I definitely did all of those things. Yet I've seen authors use "or" in such contexts as well. "Discussed, corresponded, or otherwise communicated …" would just mean I didn't do them all at once, no?

So which is best? Logically, grammatically, aesthetically, acoustically? Thanks.

 

If you're saying you've done all of the things listed, the correct word is "and", although in this example I'm not sure why anyone would say they'd done all three because they are more or less the same.

 

^ Logically then it's 'and' (like what @Seren said)

Grammatically that'll be correct too I'd say. Aesthetically? I can't comment save for toying with fonts, but acoustically – it reverberated well when I read it out here in my office. Bounced off the walls and came back all echoically resonant it did, what with my Richard Burton voice and all.

Colleagues aren't about by the way.

 

I'm confused. Has the OP been edited out? If not, what in hell is rrgrr supposed to mean??

 

Yes. He edited the OP, which is a faux pas for exactly this reason. This thread is now useless for anyone who may be having a similar issue.

/sigh...

 

Why, exactly?

 

Your guess is as good as mine, Jud.

 

Maybe we should have a board convention where you always quote the original message if you're the first person to reply. (I realize this doesn't happen too often, but...)

(I'm on another board where it happens A LOT, plus the board software wipes quotes when the original is edited or deleted, so there's a board convention where the first post in a thread is always copied and pasted to a new post in that same thread.)

 

I was just thinking that I'm never going to reply to an OP without quoting it again.

 

I'm pretty sure the mods can go back in and put the OP back to its original state. I've seen this done a couple times in a situation very similar to this.

 

I've done it myself a few times - made a post, realised it was a stupid/unnecessary question and deleted it, but I've always changed the post to something like 'Never mind, found the answer myself.'

However, I'm not sure I advocate forcing the poster to reveal their original post.

 

I'd tend to recommend against that--even if the thread is still just your original post, someone may already be responding, and even if you no longer care, they may care about their response and any continuing discussion. Maybe instead just add a note to the post?

 

Yeah, probably the better option. I think I've done this, too.