Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.misc > #1911 > unrolled thread
| Started by | RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-03-23 12:06 +0000 |
| Last post | 2014-03-23 19:23 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 165 — 42 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.misc
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: ebooks RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-03-23 12:06 +0000
Re: ebooks "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-03-23 12:11 +0000
Re: ebooks Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2014-03-23 14:43 +0000
Re: ebooks Hils <hils@saynotospam.net> - 2014-03-23 16:14 +0000
Re: ebooks root <NoEMail@home.org> - 2014-03-23 18:09 +0000
Re: ebooks "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-03-23 19:21 +0000
Re: ebooks Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2014-03-23 20:34 +0000
Re: ebooks Alan Bowler <atbowler@thinkage.ca> - 2014-06-13 14:14 -0400
Re: ebooks "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-06-13 21:44 +0100
Re: ebooks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-06-13 16:53 -0400
Re: ebooks Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2014-06-14 08:37 +0100
Re: ebooks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-06-14 18:34 -0400
Re: ebooks RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-06-15 10:40 +0000
Re: ebooks "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-06-15 12:05 +0100
Re: ebooks Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-06-15 11:20 +0000
Re: ebooks "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-06-15 12:37 +0100
Re: ebooks root <NoEMail@home.org> - 2014-06-15 17:48 +0000
Re: ebooks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-06-15 15:59 -0400
Re: ebooks "Oeter Johns" <oj19854@nospam.com> - 2014-06-16 06:30 +1000
Re: ebooks Andy Leighton <andyl@azaal.plus.com> - 2014-06-16 04:04 -0500
Re: ebooks Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-06-16 11:44 +0000
Re: ebooks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-06-16 10:32 -0400
Re: ebooks Andy Leighton <andyl@azaal.plus.com> - 2014-06-16 10:43 -0500
Re: ebooks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-06-16 13:13 -0400
Re: ebooks "Oeter Johns" <oj19854@nospam.com> - 2014-06-17 06:45 +1000
Re: ebooks "Oeter Johns" <oj19854@nospam.com> - 2014-06-17 06:36 +1000
Re: ebooks RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-06-15 22:43 +0000
Re: ebooks Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-06-15 23:26 +0000
Re: ebooks "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-06-16 22:01 +0100
Re: ebooks "Oeter Johns" <oj19854@nospam.com> - 2014-06-15 06:27 +1000
Re: ebooks "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-03-23 19:09 +0000
Re: ebooks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-03-24 01:55 +0000
Re: ebooks Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2014-03-24 10:35 +0000
Re: ebooks Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2014-03-24 13:01 -0400
Re: ebooks Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des@des.no> - 2014-03-24 17:15 +0100
Re: ebooks Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2014-03-24 15:07 +0000
Re: ebooks Rich <rich@example.com> - 2014-03-24 17:13 +0000
Re: ebooks Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2014-03-24 13:07 -0500
Re: ebooks "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2014-03-24 13:28 -0500
Re: ebooks Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-03-24 21:48 +0100
Re: ebooks Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2014-03-24 22:57 +0000
Re: ebooks "Lanto J." <lantoj78@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 08:14 +1100
Re: ebooks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-03-25 00:01 +0000
Re: ebooks "Lanto J." <lantoj78@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 07:17 +1100
Re: ebooks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-03-25 23:44 +0000
Re: ebooks "Lanto J." <lantoj78@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 12:01 +1100
Re: ebooks Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2014-03-26 13:36 +0000
Re: ebooks "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-03-26 20:08 +0000
Re: ebooks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-03-24 14:48 -0400
Re: ebooks Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-03-25 18:13 -0400
Re: ebooks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-03-27 01:20 -0400
Re: ebooks Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2014-03-25 05:49 +0000
Re: ebooks Hils <hils@saynotospam.net> - 2014-03-25 07:06 +0000
Re: ebooks Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2014-03-25 08:19 -0500
Re: ebooks Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2014-03-25 09:40 -0400
Re: ebooks "Slp" <slp0987@nospam.com> - 2014-03-26 11:14 +1100
Re: ebooks Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2014-03-25 15:42 -0400
Re: ebooks Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-03-25 11:47 -0500
Re: ebooks Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-03-25 19:25 -0400
Re: ebooks Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2014-03-26 12:19 -0400
Re: ebooks Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-03-26 08:25 -0500
Re: ebooks Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-03-26 16:01 -0400
Re: ebooks RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-03-26 20:38 +0000
Re: ebooks "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2014-03-27 08:19 +1100
Re: ebooks Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-03-26 15:58 -0500
Re: ebooks Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-03-27 06:28 -0400
Re: ebooks Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des@des.no> - 2014-03-26 22:03 +0100
Re: ebooks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-03-27 00:46 -0400
Re: ebooks "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2014-03-26 15:01 -0500
Re: ebooks scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2014-03-26 20:57 +0000
Re: ebooks "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-03-27 13:23 +0000
Re: ebooks Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-03-27 17:48 +0100
Re: ebooks Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-03-27 08:26 -0500
Re: ebooks greymausg <maus@mail.com> - 2014-03-27 14:55 +0000
Re: ebooks "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2014-03-27 10:05 -0500
Re: ebooks Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-03-27 11:55 -0500
Re: ebooks "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2014-03-27 14:25 -0500
Re: ebooks scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2014-03-27 20:44 +0000
Re: ebooks Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2014-03-28 01:38 +0000
Re: ebooks "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2014-03-27 22:37 -0500
Re: ebooks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-03-27 23:52 -0400
Re: ebooks "Slp" <slp0987@nospam.com> - 2014-03-28 16:07 +1100
Re: ebooks Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-03-28 10:52 -0500
Re: ebooks "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2014-03-28 11:57 -0500
Re: ebooks Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-03-28 14:41 -0500
Re: ebooks Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2014-03-28 21:27 +0000
Re: ebooks "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2014-03-28 17:02 -0500
Re: ebooks Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2014-03-28 23:46 -0400
Re: ebooks Philip Shaw <jnufcvyvuc@tznvy.pbz> - 2014-04-02 01:32 +0000
Re: ebooks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-04-02 14:28 +0000
Re: ebooks Philip Shaw <jnufcvyvuc@tznvy.pbz> - 2014-04-07 05:32 +0000
Re: ebooks "John" <j@j.j> - 2014-04-17 16:36 -0700
Re: ebooks "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-04-02 07:31 -0800
Re: ebooks scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2014-03-26 13:38 +0000
Re: ebooks Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-03-26 11:14 -0500
Re: ebooks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-03-27 00:56 -0400
Re: ebooks Clark G <clarkm.geimsler@ieeemmm.org> - 2014-03-27 16:52 +0000
Re: ebooks "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2014-03-27 14:03 -0500
Re: ebooks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-03-27 23:07 -0400
Re: ebooks Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-03-27 21:44 +0100
Re: ebooks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-03-26 13:51 +0000
Re: ebooks "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-03-26 09:22 -0800
Re: ebooks "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2014-03-26 13:54 -0500
Re: ebooks davidmylastname@acm.org (David Griffith) - 2014-03-27 03:41 +0000
Re: ebooks Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2014-03-27 07:36 -0400
Re: ebooks Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-03-28 03:40 -0400
Re: ebooks Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-03-27 17:59 +0100
Re: ebooks Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2014-03-26 15:38 -0700
Re: ebooks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-03-26 22:09 -0400
Re: ebooks "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2014-03-27 13:55 -0500
Re: ebooks Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2014-03-28 02:27 +0000
Re: ebooks cb@bobby.df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) - 2014-03-28 10:42 +0000
Re: ebooks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-03-27 23:12 -0400
Re: ebooks Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2014-03-28 23:17 -0700
Re: ebooks Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-03-26 16:06 -0400
Re: ebooks "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-03-26 09:19 -0800
Re: ebooks "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2014-03-26 13:50 -0500
Re: ebooks Hils <hils@saynotospam.net> - 2014-03-26 20:00 +0000
Re: ebooks "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-03-26 13:30 -0800
Re: ebooks Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-03-26 15:51 -0500
Re: ebooks Will Honea <whonea@whonea.net> - 2014-03-26 13:09 -0600
Re: ebooks Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2014-03-26 19:23 -0400
Re: ebooks "Slp" <slp0987@nospam.com> - 2014-03-27 08:12 +1100
Re: ebooks despen@verizon.net (Dan.Espen) - 2014-03-26 19:24 -0400
Re: ebooks Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2014-03-26 23:40 +0000
Re: ebooks Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-03-27 06:36 -0400
Knuth/TeX (was Re: ebooks) RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-03-27 14:33 +0000
Re: Knuth/TeX (was Re: ebooks) "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2014-03-27 14:01 -0500
Re: ebooks rpw3@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock) - 2014-03-27 03:10 +0000
Re: ebooks Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-03-25 08:19 -0500
Re: ebooks Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2014-03-25 15:16 +0000
Re: ebooks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-03-25 13:32 +0000
Re: ebooks RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-03-25 15:20 +0000
Re: ebooks Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2014-03-25 15:49 -0400
Re: ebooks RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-03-25 15:58 +0000
Re: ebooks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-03-27 01:46 -0400
Re: ebooks "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-03-25 08:48 -0800
Re: ebooks RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-03-25 21:20 +0000
Re: ebooks "Slp" <slp0987@nospam.com> - 2014-03-26 07:31 +1100
Re: ebooks Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-03-25 08:42 -0400
Re: ebooks Will Honea <whonea@whonea.net> - 2014-03-24 12:52 -0600
Re: ebooks Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2014-03-24 20:12 -0400
Re: ebooks Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-03-24 15:54 -0500
Re: ebooks Rob Myers <rob@robmyers.org> - 2014-03-24 22:19 +0000
Re: ebooks "Slp" <slp0987@nospam.com> - 2014-03-25 07:54 +1100
Re: ebooks scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us (Scott Alfter) - 2014-03-24 16:21 +0000
Re: ebooks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-03-24 17:02 +0000
Re: ebooks Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2014-03-24 12:21 -0500
Re: ebooks Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-03-24 19:50 +0000
Re: ebooks Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2014-03-24 22:48 +0000
Re: ebooks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-03-24 23:42 +0000
Re: ebooks Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2014-03-25 15:07 +0000
Re: ebooks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-03-25 23:40 +0000
Re: ebooks Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des@des.no> - 2014-03-26 21:57 +0100
Re: ebooks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-03-28 13:58 +0000
Re: ebooks Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des@des.no> - 2014-03-28 15:44 +0100
Re: ebooks "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 11:35 +1100
Re: ebooks "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 07:28 +1100
Re: ebooks Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2014-03-24 22:31 +0000
Re: ebooks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-03-25 00:06 +0000
Re: ebooks "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 07:06 +1100
Re: ebooks Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-03-24 10:25 -0400
Re: ebooks Mike Sanders <mike@taco-shack.cow> - 2014-03-24 06:04 +0000
Re: ebooks Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-03-26 13:17 +0100
Re: ebooks Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2014-03-23 19:23 -0400
Page 5 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 Next page →
| From | Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-27 23:52 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <alpine.LNX.2.02.1403272347250.16623@darkstar.example.org> |
| In reply to | #2091 |
On Thu, 27 Mar 2014, Osmium wrote:
> "Johny B Good" wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 14:25:40 -0500, "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "Stephen Sprunk" wrote:
>>>
>>>> I suspect the editors are still around but they're either not as
>>>> competent as (or more lax than) expected. It's mostly stuff like faulty
>>>> parallelism ("I like dogs and to swim") or improper cases ("if I was a
>>>> dog"), but now and then even obvious errors like homophones or
>>>> missing/extra commas will slip through.
>>>
>>> I was trying to figure out if the fuel bladder on a 757 was empty or full
>>> of nitrogen or what. Turns out there is no bladder, it's fuel in an
>>> aluminum container. (Which leaves my question unresolved.) In any event,
>>> _The Seattle Times_ had this:
>>>
>>> "Another contrast between the machine shops of Auburn and other Boeing
>>> divisions is that many Auburn workers have now idea what they're making.
>>> The
>>> shapes they create often seem almost abstract. "
>>> And your guess is that a human read that? It is almost surely a spell
>>> checker induced error.
>>>
>>> Looks like an interesting - but very long - article. I wish I had time to
>>> read it. Note that this is part 4 of 8.
>>>
>>> http://seattletimes.com/news/business/757/part04/
>>>
>>
>> I missed the error at first reading and it took a very careful second
>> reading to spot it.
>>
>> It's not absolutely clear how the following arose:-
>>
>> "many Auburn workers have now idea what they're making.".
>>
>> The error might not be the simple addition of 'w' to the end of 'no'.
>>
>> It could simply be due to a 'brain fart' on the author's part who may
>> have intended to write:-
>>
>> "many Auburn workers now have no idea what they're making."
>>
>> which seems the more likely intended wording from the context.
>
> And sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
>
> In any event, it is crystal clear to me that a large, metropolitan newspaper
> put out a *major piece* without proofreading. This is not a last minute
> thing about a small bonfire almost getting out of control
>
There's less oversight as they cut back jobs.
The local paper runs a "what's closed" piece just before every holiday.
And at some point the shopping rules were changed, so some holidays became
mandatory. But come labor day (one of those mandatory holidays), the
paper ran the usual "what's closed" but it clearly was what had been
printed in the past, since it said "most grocery stores will be open" when
that was no longer the case.
I wrote a letter to the paper that year, no correction, and for the next
three years after that, I wrote the same basic letter. Nobody paid
attention to my letter, nobody noticed the error in the listing, nobody
said "hey things have changed, we better check this". Finally after four
years of this happening, the listing was updated.
And yes, it's not just getting rid of the editors and the fact checkers.
The writers with the seniority get paid more, so when job cuts need to be
made (because the paper needs to show a profit to the conglomerate that
owns it and other papers), they offer buyouts to the senior writers. Those
are the ones who have paid attention to a 'beat" for a long time, the ones
who don't have to remember details but will remember "there was a story
about that, we better check...". So even the fact checkers that remain
may not have been there long enough to remember that something had
changed.
Michael
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Slp" <slp0987@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-28 16:07 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <bpkeevFeg0kU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #2092 |
"Michael Black" <et472@ncf.ca> wrote in message
news:alpine.LNX.2.02.1403272347250.16623@darkstar.example.org...
> On Thu, 27 Mar 2014, Osmium wrote:
>
>> "Johny B Good" wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 14:25:40 -0500, "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Stephen Sprunk" wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I suspect the editors are still around but they're either not as
>>>>> competent as (or more lax than) expected. It's mostly stuff like
>>>>> faulty
>>>>> parallelism ("I like dogs and to swim") or improper cases ("if I was a
>>>>> dog"), but now and then even obvious errors like homophones or
>>>>> missing/extra commas will slip through.
>>>>
>>>> I was trying to figure out if the fuel bladder on a 757 was empty or
>>>> full
>>>> of nitrogen or what. Turns out there is no bladder, it's fuel in an
>>>> aluminum container. (Which leaves my question unresolved.) In any
>>>> event,
>>>> _The Seattle Times_ had this:
>>>>
>>>> "Another contrast between the machine shops of Auburn and other Boeing
>>>> divisions is that many Auburn workers have now idea what they're
>>>> making.
>>>> The
>>>> shapes they create often seem almost abstract. "
>>>> And your guess is that a human read that? It is almost surely a spell
>>>> checker induced error.
>>>>
>>>> Looks like an interesting - but very long - article. I wish I had time
>>>> to
>>>> read it. Note that this is part 4 of 8.
>>>>
>>>> http://seattletimes.com/news/business/757/part04/
>>>>
>>>
>>> I missed the error at first reading and it took a very careful second
>>> reading to spot it.
>>>
>>> It's not absolutely clear how the following arose:-
>>>
>>> "many Auburn workers have now idea what they're making.".
>>>
>>> The error might not be the simple addition of 'w' to the end of 'no'.
>>>
>>> It could simply be due to a 'brain fart' on the author's part who may
>>> have intended to write:-
>>>
>>> "many Auburn workers now have no idea what they're making."
>>>
>>> which seems the more likely intended wording from the context.
>>
>> And sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
>>
>> In any event, it is crystal clear to me that a large, metropolitan
>> newspaper
>> put out a *major piece* without proofreading. This is not a last minute
>> thing about a small bonfire almost getting out of control
> There's less oversight as they cut back jobs.
And it makes sense to cut back the proof reading before
cutting back on those who do produce the text people
read when you have to cut back because the revenue
has dropped and you will go bust if you don't.
> The local paper runs a "what's closed" piece just before every holiday.
> And at some point the shopping rules were changed, so some holidays became
> mandatory. But come labor day (one of those mandatory holidays), the
> paper ran the usual "what's closed" but it clearly was what had been
> printed in the past, since it said "most grocery stores will be open" when
> that was no longer the case.
>
> I wrote a letter to the paper that year, no correction, and for the next
> three years after that, I wrote the same basic letter. Nobody paid
> attention to my letter, nobody noticed the error in the listing, nobody
> said "hey things have changed, we better check this". Finally after four
> years of this happening, the listing was updated.
>
> And yes, it's not just getting rid of the editors and the fact checkers.
> The writers with the seniority get paid more, so when job cuts need to be
> made (because the paper needs to show a profit to the conglomerate that
> owns it and other papers), they offer buyouts to the senior writers. Those
> are the ones who have paid attention to a 'beat" for a long time, the ones
> who don't have to remember details but will remember "there was a story
> about that, we better check...". So even the fact checkers that remain
> may not have been there long enough to remember that something had
> changed.
>
> Michael
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-28 10:52 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <lh45s2$t6f$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #2082 |
On 27-Mar-14 14:25, Osmium wrote: > In any event, _The Seattle Times_ had this: > > "Another contrast between the machine shops of Auburn and other > Boeing divisions is that many Auburn workers have now idea what > they're making. The shapes they create often seem almost abstract. " > And your guess is that a human read that? It is almost surely a > spell checker induced error. I've seen people make that mistake (or "know") as a typo; I agree that an editor should have corrected it, but nobody's perfect. My concern is with the overall rate of errors, not individual instances. Based on what I see in my peers' writing, including folks who write professionally and/or have English degrees, that article was probably far worse before an editor got ahold of it, and that one just slipped through. (Interestingly, my spell-checker doesn't like "ahold", but several sources agree it's acceptable, at least in informal writing.) S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-28 11:57 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <bplnvqFn00dU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #2110 |
"Stephen Sprunk" wrote: > On 27-Mar-14 14:25, Osmium wrote: >> In any event, _The Seattle Times_ had this: >> >> "Another contrast between the machine shops of Auburn and other >> Boeing divisions is that many Auburn workers have now idea what >> they're making. The shapes they create often seem almost abstract. " >> And your guess is that a human read that? It is almost surely a >> spell checker induced error. > > I've seen people make that mistake [elided] as a typo; Really? The desired sequence is 'o' space 'i'. Look at a keyboard and where the 'w' is. no and now are not homophones. How could anyone possibly make that error? The only conceivable explanation I can see would be an obscure alternate keyboard arrangement which would allow a fat finger mistake, a Dvorak keyboard doesn't allow this mistake. It seems obvious to me, he typed no with a fat finger. The spell checker refused that word and offered now as an alternate and the author accepted it. I do it all the time and see other people do it too. Totally unrelated words - but real words - stuck in text, seemingly at random. That's why, in an earlier post, I proposed spell checkers provide a list of the changes they made, kind of like an audit trail.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-28 14:41 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <lh4j9b$ah2$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #2113 |
On 28-Mar-14 11:57, Osmium wrote: > "Stephen Sprunk" wrote: >> On 27-Mar-14 14:25, Osmium wrote: >>> In any event, _The Seattle Times_ had this: >>> >>> "Another contrast between the machine shops of Auburn and other >>> Boeing divisions is that many Auburn workers have now idea what >>> they're making. The shapes they create often seem almost >>> abstract. " And your guess is that a human read that? It is >>> almost surely a spell checker induced error. >> >> I've seen people make that mistake [elided] as a typo; > > Really? The desired sequence is 'o' space 'i'. Look at a keyboard > and where the 'w' is. no and now are not homophones. But "know" is a homophone, and "now" is halfway between "no" and "know", so I can see how that particular example might happen. > How could anyone possibly make that error? ... > > It seems obvious to me, he typed no with a fat finger. The spell > checker refused that word and offered now as an alternate and the > author accepted it. I do it all the time and see other people do it > too. I can't recall having ever manually selected the wrong suggestion. Much more common for me is that my word processor (or phone) will auto-correct to the wrong word without me noticing; my email editor doesn't do that. Also common is telling my fingers to type one word yet the word that appears on the screen is a different (but correctly spelled) word, usually starting with the same few letters. > Totally unrelated words - but real words - stuck in text, > seemingly at random. I do that occasionally; it's typically the result of (re)moving the wrong word(s) when revising what I wrote. While "in the zone", I will see what I intended to write/edit rather than what is actually there, but when I come back to the same text later, such an error is obvious. > That's why, in an earlier post, I proposed spell checkers provide a > list of the changes they made, kind of like an audit trail. The problem with such features is that the only people who will use it are the ones who don't need to. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-28 21:27 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnljbq9f.mb.catwheezel@ID-107770.user.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #2113 |
On 2014-03-28, Osmium <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote: > "Stephen Sprunk" wrote: > >> On 27-Mar-14 14:25, Osmium wrote: >>> In any event, _The Seattle Times_ had this: >>> >>> "Another contrast between the machine shops of Auburn and other >>> Boeing divisions is that many Auburn workers have now idea what >>> they're making. The shapes they create often seem almost abstract. " >>> And your guess is that a human read that? It is almost surely a >>> spell checker induced error. >> >> I've seen people make that mistake [elided] as a typo; > > Really? The desired sequence is 'o' space 'i'. Look at a keyboard > and where the 'w' is. no and now are not homophones. How could > anyone possibly make that error? The only conceivable explanation I > can see would be an obscure alternate keyboard arrangement which would > allow a fat finger mistake, a Dvorak keyboard doesn't allow this > mistake. > > It seems obvious to me, he typed no with a fat finger. The spell > checker refused that word and offered now as an alternate and the > author accepted it. I do it all the time and see other people do it > too. Totally unrelated words - but real words - stuck in text, > seemingly at random. That's why, in an earlier post, I proposed > spell checkers provide a list of the changes they made, kind of like > an audit trail. Can your text editor or word processor be set so as not to auto-correct possible spelling mistakes? The decision should always be made by the writer, not the machine. -- -- ^^^^^^^^^^ -- Whiskers -- ~~~~~~~~~~
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-28 17:02 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <bpm9rrFqop1U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #2115 |
"Whiskers" wrote: > On 2014-03-28, Osmium <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote: >> "Stephen Sprunk" wrote: >> >>> On 27-Mar-14 14:25, Osmium wrote: >>>> In any event, _The Seattle Times_ had this: >>>> >>>> "Another contrast between the machine shops of Auburn and other >>>> Boeing divisions is that many Auburn workers have now idea what >>>> they're making. The shapes they create often seem almost abstract. " >>>> And your guess is that a human read that? It is almost surely a >>>> spell checker induced error. >>> >>> I've seen people make that mistake [elided] as a typo; >> >> Really? The desired sequence is 'o' space 'i'. Look at a keyboard >> and where the 'w' is. no and now are not homophones. How could >> anyone possibly make that error? The only conceivable explanation I >> can see would be an obscure alternate keyboard arrangement which would >> allow a fat finger mistake, a Dvorak keyboard doesn't allow this >> mistake. >> >> It seems obvious to me, he typed no with a fat finger. The spell >> checker refused that word and offered now as an alternate and the >> author accepted it. I do it all the time and see other people do it >> too. Totally unrelated words - but real words - stuck in text, >> seemingly at random. That's why, in an earlier post, I proposed >> spell checkers provide a list of the changes they made, kind of like >> an audit trail. > > Can your text editor or word processor be set so as not to auto-correct > possible spelling mistakes? The decision should always be made by the > writer, not the machine. Yes and I use manual correct only. I try to do many things (including typing) faster than I can. Some people, mostly women, think they are princess Anastasia. One of my problems is I am not as fast as I think I am. My default mode is "Let's get this over with". A post mortem list would allow me to see what damn fool mistakes I have made. This is not a logical problem, it is a psychological problem. This link describing a Type A personality describes me pretty darn well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83AwKedowDU&feature=player_detailpage
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-28 23:46 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <lh51k0$nad$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #2115 |
On 03/28/2014 05:27 PM, Whiskers wrote: > On 2014-03-28, Osmium <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote: >> "Stephen Sprunk" wrote: >> >>> On 27-Mar-14 14:25, Osmium wrote: >>>> In any event, _The Seattle Times_ had this: >>>> >>>> "Another contrast between the machine shops of Auburn and other >>>> Boeing divisions is that many Auburn workers have now idea what >>>> they're making. The shapes they create often seem almost abstract. " >>>> And your guess is that a human read that? It is almost surely a >>>> spell checker induced error. >>> >>> I've seen people make that mistake [elided] as a typo; >> >> Really? The desired sequence is 'o' space 'i'. Look at a keyboard >> and where the 'w' is. no and now are not homophones. How could >> anyone possibly make that error? The only conceivable explanation I >> can see would be an obscure alternate keyboard arrangement which would >> allow a fat finger mistake, a Dvorak keyboard doesn't allow this >> mistake. >> >> It seems obvious to me, he typed no with a fat finger. The spell >> checker refused that word and offered now as an alternate and the >> author accepted it. I do it all the time and see other people do it >> too. Totally unrelated words - but real words - stuck in text, >> seemingly at random. That's why, in an earlier post, I proposed >> spell checkers provide a list of the changes they made, kind of like >> an audit trail. > > Can your text editor or word processor be set so as not to auto-correct > possible spelling mistakes? The decision should always be made by the > writer, not the machine. > I usually do this if I'm typing something longer than a paragraph. When I'm done I run spellcheck on the whole thing and decide whether to accept its suggestions or not. Aside - I now read news on my laptop, actually sitting on my lap. Besides not being able to see the keys too well at this angle it offers the convenience of key bounce, so I ocaassionally get some doubled letters. -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Philip Shaw <jnufcvyvuc@tznvy.pbz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-02 01:32 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnljmq6i.2oe.philip@aphrodite-3.local> |
| In reply to | #2113 |
On 2014-03-28, Osmium <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote: > Really? The desired sequence is 'o' space 'i'. Look at a keyboard and > where the 'w' is. no and now are not homophones. > How could anyone possibly make that error? The only conceivable explanation > I can see would be an obscure alternate keyboard arrangement which would > allow a fat finger mistake, a Dvorak keyboard doesn't allow this mistake. > > It seems obvious to me, he typed no with a fat finger. The spell checker > refused that word and offered now as an alternate and the author accepted > it. I do it all the time and see other people do it too. Totally unrelated > words - but real words - stuck in text, seemingly at random. That's why, in > an earlier post, I proposed spell checkers provide a list of the changes > they made, kind of like an audit trail. Another useful feature would be context-aware spell-checking. Using the surrounding words, the computer can guess the most likely words there, based on the same databases used for translation, speech recognition, and spam generation, reducing the chance that it will reccomend the wrong one. Looking at neighbouring misspelt words would also help: it is quite irritating when a transposed space gets "corrected" into two wrong words, especially when those words are much further from the erroneous text.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-02 14:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnljo7k2.b7e.g.kreme@amelia.local> |
| In reply to | #2200 |
In message <slrnljmq6i.2oe.philip@aphrodite-3.local> Philip Shaw <jnufcvyvuc@tznvy.pbz> wrote: > On 2014-03-28, Osmium <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote: >> Really? The desired sequence is 'o' space 'i'. Look at a keyboard and >> where the 'w' is. no and now are not homophones. >> How could anyone possibly make that error? The only conceivable explanation >> I can see would be an obscure alternate keyboard arrangement which would >> allow a fat finger mistake, a Dvorak keyboard doesn't allow this mistake. >> >> It seems obvious to me, he typed no with a fat finger. The spell checker >> refused that word and offered now as an alternate and the author accepted >> it. I do it all the time and see other people do it too. Totally unrelated >> words - but real words - stuck in text, seemingly at random. That's why, in >> an earlier post, I proposed spell checkers provide a list of the changes >> they made, kind of like an audit trail. > Another useful feature would be context-aware spell-checking. Using > the surrounding words, the computer can guess the most likely words > there, based on the same databases used for translation, speech > recognition, and spam generation, reducing the chance that it will > reccomend the wrong one. Looking at neighbouring misspelt words would > also help: it is quite irritating when a transposed space gets > "corrected" into two wrong words, especially when those words are much > further from the erroneous text. The iPhone already does this, and will often 'go back' and correct and its to it's or a were to we're several words later. Kind of cool, but also annoying when it gets it wrong. -- Nothing like grilling a kosher dog over human hair to bring out the subtle flavors.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Philip Shaw <jnufcvyvuc@tznvy.pbz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-07 05:32 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnlk4e3r.mp4.philip@aphrodite-3.local> |
| In reply to | #2211 |
On 2014-04-02, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: > In message <slrnljmq6i.2oe.philip@aphrodite-3.local> > Philip Shaw <jnufcvyvuc@tznvy.pbz> wrote: >> On 2014-03-28, Osmium <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote: >>> Really? The desired sequence is 'o' space 'i'. Look at a keyboard and >>> where the 'w' is. no and now are not homophones. >>> How could anyone possibly make that error? The only conceivable explanation >>> I can see would be an obscure alternate keyboard arrangement which would >>> allow a fat finger mistake, a Dvorak keyboard doesn't allow this mistake. >>> >>> It seems obvious to me, he typed no with a fat finger. The spell checker >>> refused that word and offered now as an alternate and the author accepted >>> it. I do it all the time and see other people do it too. Totally unrelated >>> words - but real words - stuck in text, seemingly at random. That's why, in >>> an earlier post, I proposed spell checkers provide a list of the changes >>> they made, kind of like an audit trail. > >> Another useful feature would be context-aware spell-checking. Using >> the surrounding words, the computer can guess the most likely words >> there, based on the same databases used for translation, speech >> recognition, and spam generation, reducing the chance that it will >> reccomend the wrong one. Looking at neighbouring misspelt words would >> also help: it is quite irritating when a transposed space gets >> "corrected" into two wrong words, especially when those words are much >> further from the erroneous text. > > The iPhone already does this, and will often 'go back' and correct and > its to it's or a were to we're several words later. Kind of cool, but > also annoying when it gets it wrong. On OS X, the auto-correct will sometimes delay correcting words for a little while, but it doesn't seem to apply any more intelligence to how it corrects them when it does so. (More annoyingly, it also moves the cursor momentarily whenever it auto-corrects a word, so if you're dead unlucky, it introduces an extra spelling mistake for you, although it takes a real fluke to do it unless you're short of memory.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "John" <j@j.j> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-17 16:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <lipof5$bum$1@jefelex.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #2302 |
"Philip Shaw" <jnufcvyvuc@tznvy.pbz> wrote in message news:slrnlk4e3r.mp4.philip@aphrodite-3.local... > On 2014-04-02, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: >> In message <slrnljmq6i.2oe.philip@aphrodite-3.local> >> Philip Shaw <jnufcvyvuc@tznvy.pbz> wrote: >>> On 2014-03-28, Osmium <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote: >>>> Really? The desired sequence is 'o' space 'i'. Look at a keyboard and >>>> where the 'w' is. no and now are not homophones. >>>> How could anyone possibly make that error? The only conceivable >>>> explanation >>>> I can see would be an obscure alternate keyboard arrangement which >>>> would >>>> allow a fat finger mistake, a Dvorak keyboard doesn't allow this >>>> mistake. >>>> >>>> It seems obvious to me, he typed no with a fat finger. The spell >>>> checker >>>> refused that word and offered now as an alternate and the author >>>> accepted >>>> it. I do it all the time and see other people do it too. Totally >>>> unrelated >>>> words - but real words - stuck in text, seemingly at random. That's >>>> why, in >>>> an earlier post, I proposed spell checkers provide a list of the >>>> changes >>>> they made, kind of like an audit trail. >> >>> Another useful feature would be context-aware spell-checking. Using >>> the surrounding words, the computer can guess the most likely words >>> there, based on the same databases used for translation, speech >>> recognition, and spam generation, reducing the chance that it will >>> reccomend the wrong one. Looking at neighbouring misspelt words would >>> also help: it is quite irritating when a transposed space gets >>> "corrected" into two wrong words, especially when those words are much >>> further from the erroneous text. >> >> The iPhone already does this, and will often 'go back' and correct and >> its to it's or a were to we're several words later. Kind of cool, but >> also annoying when it gets it wrong. > > On OS X, the auto-correct will sometimes delay correcting words for a > little while, but it doesn't seem to apply any more intelligence to > how it corrects them when it does so. (More annoyingly, it also moves > the cursor momentarily whenever it auto-corrects a word, so if you're > dead unlucky, it introduces an extra spelling mistake for you, > although it takes a real fluke to do it unless you're short of > memory.) I prefer not to use a spell checker - I like to try to spell the words correctly the first time. although there are times when I write an important document, I'll use one in those cases. (just to be sure the spellchecker doesn't make mistakes!! ;)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-02 07:31 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <904.240T25T4513382@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
| In reply to | #2200 |
In article <slrnljmq6i.2oe.philip@aphrodite-3.local>, jnufcvyvuc@tznvy.pbz (Philip Shaw) writes: > Another useful feature would be context-aware spell-checking. Using > the surrounding words, the computer can guess the most likely words > there, based on the same databases used for translation, speech > recognition, and spam generation, reducing the chance that it will > reccomend the wrong one. Looking at neighbouring misspelt words would > also help: it is quite irritating when a transposed space gets > "corrected" into two wrong words, especially when those words are > much further from the erroneous text. My cow orkers would appreciate this. -- /~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs) \ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way. X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855. / \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-26 13:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <HLAYu.43950$1r1.9851@fx07.iad> |
| In reply to | #2013 |
Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> writes: >On 03/25/2014 07:25 PM, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote: >> In <lgs85i$n8f$2@dont-email.me>, on 03/25/2014 >> at 03:42 PM, Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> said: >> >>> Punctuation and spelling are still important. An otherwise good >>> book is diminished by mis-spellings that spellcheckers can't >>> catch - reign vs. rein vs. rain, for example. >> >> Sure, and in some alternate universe where the publishers' editors >> catch those errors, I'd be all for it. >> > >I occasionally find such errors in professionally published stuff, but >it's rare - finding one in a book is unusual, although errors are >getting more common. Self-published stuff seems to have a factor of ten >or more errors. I dunno - I read a popular fiction novel a while back; Harper imprint. In several places the heroine applied the breaks to slow her car, and she was wont to say "fire in the hold" rather than "fire in the hole". I would have expected a good editor to correct both of these, particularly in the paperback. scott
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-26 11:14 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <lguud6$jv7$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #2017 |
On 26-Mar-14 08:38, Scott Lurndal wrote: > Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> writes: >> I occasionally find such errors in professionally published stuff, but >> it's rare - finding one in a book is unusual, although errors are >> getting more common. Self-published stuff seems to have a factor of ten >> or more errors. > > I dunno - I read a popular fiction novel a while back; Harper imprint. > > In several places the heroine applied the breaks to slow her car, and > she was wont to say "fire in the hold" rather than "fire in the hole". > > I would have expected a good editor to correct both of these, particularly > in the paperback. A such few minor errors are probably inevitable in the first printing (usually hardback), but in later printings (usually paperback, which is my preference anyway) it's inexcusable for professionally-edited works. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-27 00:56 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <alpine.LNX.2.02.1403270055270.14705@darkstar.example.org> |
| In reply to | #2024 |
On Wed, 26 Mar 2014, Stephen Sprunk wrote: > On 26-Mar-14 08:38, Scott Lurndal wrote: >> Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> writes: >>> I occasionally find such errors in professionally published stuff, but >>> it's rare - finding one in a book is unusual, although errors are >>> getting more common. Self-published stuff seems to have a factor of ten >>> or more errors. >> >> I dunno - I read a popular fiction novel a while back; Harper imprint. >> >> In several places the heroine applied the breaks to slow her car, and >> she was wont to say "fire in the hold" rather than "fire in the hole". >> >> I would have expected a good editor to correct both of these, particularly >> in the paperback. > > A such few minor errors are probably inevitable in the first printing > (usually hardback), but in later printings (usually paperback, which is > my preference anyway) it's inexcusable for professionally-edited works. > I often don't notice errors in books, yet sometimes I've gotten used books where someone has decided to do that editing. Sometimes it makes sense, sometimes someone just thinks they can write better. Either way, it really is distracting, more than any original errors, seeing the scribblings in the books or magazines. I figure someone had to be quite compulsive. Michael
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Clark G <clarkm.geimsler@ieeemmm.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-27 16:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <XnsA2FD648AAEF94clarkmgmolcubcmca@78.46.70.116> |
| In reply to | #2054 |
Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote in news:alpine.LNX.2.02.1403270055270.14705@darkstar.example.org: > I often don't notice errors in books, yet sometimes I've gotten used > books where someone has decided to do that editing. Sometimes it > makes sense, sometimes someone just thinks they can write better. > Either way, it really is distracting, more than any original errors, > seeing the scribblings in the books or magazines. I figure someone > had to be quite compulsive. > > Michael When my father-in-law read the newspaper, he would underline in red pen parts of news articles and write his own commentary next to it. I found the paper more entertaining to read with his additions. -- Clark G * take away the em's to reply
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-27 14:03 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <lh1sls$2jg$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #2075 |
"Clark G" <clarkm.geimsler@ieeemmm.org> wrote in message news:XnsA2FD648AAEF94clarkmgmolcubcmca@78.46.70.116... > Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote in > news:alpine.LNX.2.02.1403270055270.14705@darkstar.example.org: > >> I often don't notice errors in books, yet sometimes I've gotten used >> books where someone has decided to do that editing. Sometimes it >> makes sense, sometimes someone just thinks they can write better. >> Either way, it really is distracting, more than any original errors, >> seeing the scribblings in the books or magazines. I figure someone >> had to be quite compulsive. >> >> Michael > > When my father-in-law read the newspaper, he would underline in red pen > parts of news articles and write his own commentary next to it. I found > the > paper more entertaining to read with his additions. > > So you read "the Yakety-Yak Daily News with father-in-law commentary". :-) Commentary was kind of an ancient form of hypertext! -- numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-27 23:07 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <alpine.LNX.2.02.1403272306430.16623@darkstar.example.org> |
| In reply to | #2075 |
On Thu, 27 Mar 2014, Clark G wrote: > Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote in > news:alpine.LNX.2.02.1403270055270.14705@darkstar.example.org: > >> I often don't notice errors in books, yet sometimes I've gotten used >> books where someone has decided to do that editing. Sometimes it >> makes sense, sometimes someone just thinks they can write better. >> Either way, it really is distracting, more than any original errors, >> seeing the scribblings in the books or magazines. I figure someone >> had to be quite compulsive. >> >> Michael > > When my father-in-law read the newspaper, he would underline in red pen > parts of news articles and write his own commentary next to it. I found the > paper more entertaining to read with his additions. > Adding commentary is different. But I think I merely dislike reading things that other people have marked up. Michael
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-27 21:44 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <q6fe0b-clm1.ln1@news.chingola.ch> |
| In reply to | #2075 |
On 2014-03-27, Clark G <clarkm.geimsler@ieeemmm.org> wrote: > > When my father-in-law read the newspaper, he would underline in red pen > parts of news articles and write his own commentary next to it. I found the > paper more entertaining to read with his additions. A favourite of mine was discovered by a neighbour in a second hand Ian Fleming paperback. It went something like this. "As Bond opened his cigarette case his teeth glinted in the sunlight". Some wit had added in the margin, "Bond usually kept his teeth in his cigarette case". -- Paul Sture "In that case," said Napoleon, "let us wait twenty minutes; when the enemy is making a false movement we must take good care not to interrupt him."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.misc
csiph-web