The discussion here has touched on a number of issues, some of which have been aired on earlier occasions.
In early 2021 there was
a discussion of where to draw the line on very rare words. This was sparked by my decision not to allow
cracid, a type of bird, on the grounds that the word was absent from nearly all dictionaries, and hardly ever used outside very specialist publications. Pat queried this reasoning, arguing that since it is a "valid" word, it should be accepted. Most of the comments from other forumites seemed to be agreeing that a word should not be rejected on the grounds of obscurity, provided it was listed in at least one "reputable" dictionary. However there were divergent views about which are the reputable dictionaries, mkenuk listing a few, which did not include either of the unabridged dictionaries that listed
cracid, while Morbius suggested we go so far as to include user-generated dictionaries like Wiktionary and the Urban Dictionary.
This led me to decide to be more willing to accept obscure words, and ultimately I agreed to accept the original suggestion,
cracid.
Shortly afterwards there was
another discussion of how to assess word suggestions, focusing on ways of simplifying the decision process, so suggestions could be dealt with more promptly and without a backlog of suggestions building up. A variety of suggestions were made, and eventually I
outlined the approach I proposed to try out. In relation to new word suggestions I said:
New word suggestions will be automatically accepted if the word is in any of the current general dictionaries I have access to. Words not so listed will normally be summarily dismissed. I'll make an exception for any word that I think has an obvious claim to be accepted - e.g. a recent coinage. If the forumite making a suggestion provides a dictionary reference, the suggestion will likely be approved more speedily. This system will result in the non-acceptance of some words that I would have accepted in the past, such as derived words not listed by dictionaries. (E.g. some less common un- words.)
I have to say, I haven't precisely been following that plan, but I have perhaps streamlined my considerations enough to keep up with the incoming suggestions. And I have perhaps been more willing to accept quite obscure words. But not all, as ridethetalk can attest.
One proposition that pat has put forward in the current discussion, and in earlier ones, is that it doesn't matter how many rare words we add to the list, since nobody would be affected apart from the odd individual who may be aiming to play all the words. She said:
It would make no difference to the game at all if there were 100,000 rare words, so if a word is genuine, why not add it?
I take it you meant 100,000 words in a single game. (There are over 140,000 non-plural rare words in our word list.) But the Maven and Cham target levels are calculated from the total number of words possible. The more rare words in the puzzle, the higher these targets. Quite a few players do aim to reach, especially, Maven. So I think it's reasonable to exercise some restraint in adding new words.
On the other hand, If a word is known to, and used by, a player, it's understandable the player might feel disgruntled the word is not recognised, however specialist it might be. So I do lean towards allowing bird names proposed by pat, ecclesiastical terms suggested by TRex, etc. In this case RTT is suggesting an electrical term, and in light of his electrical engineering background, I'll consider it sympathetically. (More so than with quite a few of his other suggestions!) This is not to say that I'm accepting
variac - I haven't come to a decision yet, and the fact that it started out as a proprietary name and is still very often capitalized could be an obstacle.
