[TAG] Ya know, I've changed my mind.

[Thomas Adam]

On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 12:26:16PM -0700, Benjamin A. Okopnik wrote:
> Well, in reviewing it, I see that it's pretty much what I recalled:
> I agree with you when you say that the times have changed and we now
> have a different readership, but that's not a solution - it's just a
> restatement of the situation. I'm pretty comfortable with thinking
> that I perceive and understand what the situation is; the problem is
> that no solution is jumping out to suggest itself.

Well, I can't think of one either.  The ideas are there.  I assume by
"solution" you mean some way of putting them into action?  Again, I am
not sure.  Make an article out of it (rehash what was already
published?)  Heck, if the time and effort is available, I'd try and
dedicate an entire issue to this cause.   That alone ought to get some
reader's going.  :)

> If anyone is thinking that, I'm afraid that they're mistaken. I take
> the time and the trouble to edit out several types of errors, which
> includes structure and content; so do the other proofers. I also
> insert comments when I believe they're called for; i.e., I'm going to
> comment if somebody says "to edit a file, just reboot into Wind0ws and
> run Notepad" with something like

Yes, that's what I was agreeing too -- I meant "content" as rewriting
whole paragraphs to correct technical context.  But before we go off on
a tangent here, that hasn't happened.  (I can't remember what it was I
was even talking about before -- I'm sure it made sense back then.  :P)

> > Not to mention I would then assume my work was sub-standard.
>
> [blink] Do you also assume that because it's published with a header,
> a footer, and your bio?

Hmm?  No.

-- Thomas Adam

--  
"Try not to want people to like you too much, you'll just need more and
more flatteries to recharge your batteries." -- Jeffrey Lewis.