Ha, hardly. But that's my point. If people don't do it in reputable publications why would it be a big deal if they don't on the intrawebs? It's not a slight when someone who is at the top of their field is referred to by only their last name in a peer-reviewed publication.
Because in research papers it's the accepted norm, elsewhere it isn't.
Of course it does. But the papers and reporters who don't use titles all the time to refer to politicians aren't being disrespectful simply because of that fact. The Wall Street Journal is hardly a tabloid but it regularly refers to the President as "Mister Obama," "Mister Bush," etc.
But that's exactly my point - they refer to them as "Mister Obama" not just "Obama" or "Bush". I'd have no real issue if people referred to GM Ji as Mr Ji or even Ji, Han-Jae. It's the sole surname that I dislike.
Americans are used to treating our politicians as what they are; people we vote in and out of office. If we don't like them we get rid of them. We also don't have a House of "Lords." It's a different view on things that developed in our culture and not calling someone "Master," especially when they aren't part of a system we study, is similar. It's not a slight in and of itself.
As I said though, if you don't want to call someone Master or Grandmaster because they aren't part of your system that's fine, Mr Whatever is perfectly acceptable.
Sure, it's polite but it's certainly not the end of the word if it doesn't happen. It's not even necessarily a sign of disrespect.
It may not be intended that way, but sometimes unintended disrespect happens... We surely should extend politeness to everyone unless we're specifically intending to be impolite (or acknowledge/apologise afterwards if unintentional disrespect happens)?
People point out all the time that MT has posters from different countries so try to be a little culturally sensitive.
Ha ha ha! That's ironic! As we're referring to a Korean gentleman one would think that people would be more culturally sensitive and use his title, given that Koreans use titles MUCH more than westerners. I remember when learning basic Korean that you would have to use for example "Team chief Kim" or some such thing even though you'd never use that title in English. Korean culture is sensitive to the use of titles much more than western cultures:
http://www.ediplomat.com/np/cultural_etiquette/ce_kr.htm
* It is considered very impolite to address a Korean with his or her given name. Address Koreans using appropriate professional titles until specifically invited by your host or colleagues to use their given names.
* Americans should address a Korean with Mr., Mrs., Miss + family name; however, never address a high-ranking person or superior in this manner.
Now, I understand that not everyone understands this cultural difference, particularly members from different countries, but I'm not being culturally insensitive in pointing it out, I'm trying to help those that don't understand to become more culturally sensitive.
You know, the funny thing is, I know a IX dan who doesn't like being referred to as a "Grand Master." He's told people not to call him that, in fact, and if anyone deserves the title he does (not least because of that attitude, IMNSHO). But if it's important for people to be referred to by a title then I'd do it for their sake. But that's just me.
And I agree with this, if GM Ji didn't want to have a title used and has made that publicly known (or known to a small group of people as a public request) then fine. I'm also happy to use titles for people if they want it. But I think we should default to using a well accepted title or at least the more generic Mr unless we know otherwise.
Anyway, this is derailing the thread long enough. I'm sure we won't agree on the topic, but I just wanted to point it out and make my feelings known....
). Look, in lots of scholarly works authors get referenced by their last names alone with no title. Same thing in the papers for politicians a lot of the time. It doesn't mean that the people doing so are purposefully trying to insult anyone. Generally, I'll use a title if a person is well known by it with some exceptions. For example, I don't call people "sensei" because they aren't my sensei. If a person is going to be so offended that someone who isn't their student doesn't use a specific title when talking about them then the problem is with them, IMO.
