[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 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/