Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site watdaisy.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!watdaisy!ndiamond
From: ndiamond@watdaisy.UUCP (Norman Diamond)
Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers,net.nlang,net.jokes.d,net.unix,net.flame
Subject: Re: Sloppy Prose
Message-ID: <7155@watdaisy.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 28-Mar-85 14:18:58 EST
Article-I.D.: watdaisy.7155
Posted: Thu Mar 28 14:18:58 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 29-Mar-85 00:11:27 EST
References: <1351@decwrl.UUCP>
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 28
Xref: watmath net.sf-lovers:6868 net.nlang:2796 net.jokes.d:1015 net.unix:4047 net.flame:9002

> > Seen in net.sf-lovers:
> > 
> > > ... But, frankly, [author]'s pros tend to be sloppy.
> > 
> > Like that?
> 
> Hmm, in the proper net.flame context, *does* two typos constitutes 
> sloppy pros?  It has always unexaggeratedly been my humbel opinion, that 
> that are sloppy instead of typoes, scrambled sentences.  Also, verbs
> which doesn't agree with the numbers of the subject, and also which
> have failed to agree with the tenses of an other verb in the sentence.
> have failed to agree with the tenses of an other verb in the sentence.
> 
> (But this is why there are copy-editors.  (Except at Blue Jay and DAW.) )

Additional exception:  AT&T Bell Labs.  How many others wonder about the
typos in the new Unix BLTJ?  If Unix's source code had the same proportion
of uncorrected typos, no one would ever have heard of Unix.

-- 

   Norman Diamond

UUCP:  {decvax|utzoo|ihnp4|allegra}!watmath!watdaisy!ndiamond
CSNET: ndiamond%watdaisy@waterloo.csnet
ARPA:  ndiamond%watdaisy%waterloo.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa

"Opinions are those of the keyboard, and do not reflect on me or higher-ups."