| |
G4EBT > TRIVIA 29.03.03 12:49l 149 Lines 6323 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : E30882G4EBT
Read: GUEST DB0FHN
Subj: Re: the biter bitten?? (G4EBT
Path: DB0FHN<DB0RGB<DB0MRW<DB0ERF<DB0FBB<DB0IUZ<DB0ACH<DB0OVN<DB0GOS<ON0AR<
ON0AR<GB7FCR
Sent: 030329/1039Z @:GB7FCR.#16.GBR.EU #:53118 [Blackpool] FBB-7.03a $:E30882G4
From: G4EBT@GB7FCR.#16.GBR.EU
To : TRIVIA@WW
Ian, VK5QX wrote, indignantly:-
> Just can't help replying to the comments from G4EBT regarding one of my
> bulletins.
Be my guest.
> I have, over quite a period, and on a number of occasions, expressed my
> opinion that there is not much excuse for poor spelling now that
> spelling checkers are easily available.
The first task you seem to set yourself when you open a bull is to check
it for grammar, and spelling, then to correct any errors, and re-send the
highlighted text. In so doing, you attach more importance to errors than
to then content, which is a shame.
You then become indignant when others, "ridicule you" for pointing out
that in the very bulletin you send out correcting someone else's errors,
you commit similar errors yourself.
Bulletins aren't legal documents, or a flight manual for a spacecraft -
they're just ephemera, often written live. Many fine people who have much
to say, from whom we could all learn a lot, must surely be deterred from
contributing by petty criticism of trivial errors. Packet is a tiny facet
of a declining hobby - it is not "a house of correction", or a "virtual"
old folks home of the airwaves for ageing amateurs, with a bossy matron in
charge.
I write extensively for professional purposes. Though my writing style of
here differs markedly from that which I'd use in other spheres of my life,
I do try to write to a good standard, and not to make mistakes, though I
don't always succeed.
However, I recognise that some who use packet may have lower standards of
literacy, and may not have had to write (or read for that matter), in the
course of their working lives. To my mind, that doesn't in any way devalue
what they have to say.
>> "Pice" of timber? What's a "pice" then - is that an Aussie unit of
>> measurement, or - shock horror, is it a SPELLING Mistook by Ian!!!???
> Here we see a good example of G4EBT's approach of nastiness and
> ridicule.
Not so. As the title said, it's a prime example of the "biter bitten".
I thought my comment was lighthearted - not nasty, but I should have
known how easy it is to puncture your ego. Sorry, guilty as charged -
I should have made allowances for your sensitivity, with which I'm
well acquainted.
The two things that packet doesn't need is intolerance and pomposity.
Ironically, in espousing that view, I risk being seen as intolerant
towards your intolerance, if you get my drift.
> YES. I did have a spelling mistake too. Naughty me! And NO. It was not
> really a "spelling" mistake but merely a "typographical error".
So when someone else miss-spells a word it's a mistake, but when you do,
it's not really a mistake - it's an error. The subtlety of this fine
distinction is lost on me.
> I guess that I did not perform a final spelling check. I do happen to
> know how to spell "piece"
Yes, and you know how to use a spelling checker too - something you
implore others to do, but you didn't. If others make such oversights, you
say they're lazy and careless. It really doesn't matter.
> (Again naughty me!)
Not so much "naughty" as "The doughty Mr Haughty's been caughty outy" :-)
In the haughty stakes, Jacques Chirac has much to learn from packet.
> As to his gratuitous additional comments;
> I have consistently suggested and tried to assist others with problems
> associated with incorrect spelling.
If that's your sincere aim then why not send them an SP, which would
achieve that objective while at the same time, not expose them to WW
embarrassment on here?
May I suggest that few on packet seek "assistance with problems associated
with incorrect spelling". They're fellow amateurs - not pupils, and simply
put out bulletins, more in hope than expectation, that someone will read
their messages, and value what they've had to say rather than to nit-pick
the manner in which it is written.
> I have shown instances where a totally wrong and/or different meaning
> has resulted due to such problems.
If you think about it, that statement is illogical. For you to know - or
even suspect, that the wrong meaning has been conveyed, implies that you
have been able to deduce from the message content what the intended
meaning was. Hence, the message made sense.
> Additionally, I have pointed out that the use of a spelling checker is
> not the complete answer to such problems and, in some instances, can
> even result in additional difficulties as far as precise communication
> is concerned.
True - a spelling checker wouldn't pick up mistakes such as "chequer" when
"checker" is meant, or "peace" when "piece" was meant but it *can* pick up
mistakes such as pice (no such word). A trivial mistake of course, (or
"error" if you prefer), but if you practised what you preach we wouldn't
be having this conversation.
> I certainly have sympathy for those individuals who genuinely have
> problems when expressing themselves,
Sympathy doesn't manifest itself in your constant corrections. I'd say
that empathy is a more laudable sentiment in this context than sympathy.
If you empathised with the originators, you wouldn't draw attention to
their shortcomings by highlighting them in bulletins, you'd do so in
private SP's.
That way you'd be treating them in the manner in which you expect me to
treat you - with tact and respect. Perhaps now, (or maybe not), you'll
understand why I don't hold your views in high regard, albeit the feeling
is clearly mutual. I accept that your views - like mine, are sincerely
held, and unlikely to change.
> however, I do not see it as being an acceptable situation that
> "any old thing goes". To me that attitude is simply, in the main,
> just an excuse for laziness or lack of pride in one's work.
Fine, but when you display laziness and lack of pride in your own work
that you deprecate in others, you tar yourself with your own brush.
You can't have your cake and eat it.
We aren't landing 707's here for goodness sake - we're just writing
messages that hardly anyone reads.
VK has some of the most active, fun loving participants on packet.
You have plenty of VK "beacons" to guide the way.
See the light - follow!
73 - David, G4EBT @ GB7FCR
Message timed: 00:06 on 2003-Mar-29
Message sent using WinPack-Telnet V6.70
(Registered).
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
