[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: paper review The world according to whom?



On Oct 31,  7:09, "Michael C. Kaye" wrote:
} Subject: Re: paper review [TIG] The world according to whom?

> > Your censorship may be another's editorial corrections to prevent those
> > embarrassing spelling and grammar errors that tend to distract the reader
> > and detract from the author's message.
> 
> Simple errors like that shouldn't distract from the authors message, except
> for those "mental midgets" who are sitting there waiting for stuff like that to
> go, "oh goody goody, he made a mistake"! 

I think we're in an environment displacement here; Dave Tosh is
talking about web-based presentation of a professional paper, and Mike
Kaye is talking about messages such as these, via the mailinglist.
The mailinglist messages are more like talking, informal; a
scientific paper is presented, on the web, much as if it were in a
magazine, or book- the presentation can significantly affect the
reader's perception.  Such papers benefit from proofreading for
grammar, spell-checking, cogence, cohesion, etc.  Consider an analogy
of the manufacturing process: a prototype may have sloppy wiring, but
the final product is much better clean and unconfusing.  

The CRT paper was floated by the author as a trial balloon; I'm not
surprised that its science is flawed.  I was a bit surprised, as were
others, that its english was so poor, but it was a 'prototype'.

--Rob

-- 
Rob Lingelbach     | "I would give nothing for that man's religion
rob at alegria.com    |  whose very dog and cat are not the better for it."
www.alegria.com            --Rowland Hill, "Village Dialogues"

---
Thanks to Shaley Brooks for support in 1998.
No product marketing allowed on the main TIG.  Contact rob at alegria.com
1009 subscribers in 38 countries on Sat Oct 31 10:46:14 CST 1998 
subscribe/unsubscribe with that Subject: to telecine-request at alegria.com
complete information on the TIG website http://www.alegria.com/tig3/