The LibriVox "Blurb"

[paullawleyjones]

It would save maybe 1.5-2 seconds. *shrug*

[Red Herring Argument] Industrialists old and new have become very wealthy by shaving seconds off repetitive processes. [Apposite Argument] Over the course of a multi-chapter book, this could represent a significant listening time saving, while still conveying the same information.

[Availle]

It removes the repetition of "...is a Librivox recording. All Librivox recordings..." It is more concise, which, for me, is better.

It is also less precise. It does not directly imply that this recording you're listening to is a LV recording too.

"This recording (whatever it is and wherever it may come from), and all Librivox recordings (which you can find elsewhere...) are in the public domain."

It's like saying "My car, and all great sports cars, are red."
This does not mean that your car is a great sports car too.

[paullawleyjones]

It removes the repetition of "...is a Librivox recording. All Librivox recordings..." It is more concise, which, for me, is better.

It does not directly imply that this recording you're listening to is a LV recording too.

"This recording (whatever it is and wherever it may come from), and all Librivox recordings (which you can find elsewhere...) are in the public domain."

It's like saying "My car, and all great sports cars, are red." This does not mean that your car is a great sports car too.

There is a mistake in my OP; it should read "This, and all Librivox recordings, is in the public domain..."

It doesn't directly state that this is a Librivox recording (or that your car is a great sports car, too,) but it does strongly imply so by association, else why write the sentence like that?

[DACSoft]

There is a mistake in my OP; it should read "This, and all Librivox recordings, is in the public domain..."

It doesn't directly state that this is a Librivox recording (or that your car is a great sports car, too,) but it does strongly imply so by association, else why write the sentence like that?

Even with your change, it's still the same issue that Ava brings up. I believe many problems arise when statements "imply" something, or one would "infer" something, that is not actually stated. The implication that you receive may be totally different than what I get. Ava's example of the red car more clearly highlights the problem (as I actually have red car which is not a sports car ). In some cases implications and inferences are made to obfuscate the real truth of a matter.

I believe it always better to clearly state something, rather than leave it subject to misinterpretation. The intro does that, IMHO.

FWIW,