| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#27
July 29th 05, 12:00 AM
|
|||
|
|||
an_old_friend wrote:
wrote: Dave Heil wrote: an_old_friend wrote: Cmdr Buzz Corey wrote: an_old_friend wrote: cut You miss the point, Mark. Nobody can read some of the stuff you post. Any literate person can read it. Making sense out of it is another matter. Jim I have been coutesous to on this but you are straining my ability to do so "Coutesous to on this"?? Did you mean "courteous to you on this"? If so, why didn't you write it that way the first time? Courtesy means you would at least *try* using a spellchecker, and some capitalization, and some punctuation. But you steadfastly refuse to do any of that. How can you use CW a medium completely without error correction and be unable to work the meaning of simple text with the leasure of time and the abilty to look at the context You obviously don't understand "error correction". The purpose of error correction is to identify and correct errors that occur in the transmission medium - assuming the message is sent correctly in the first place! What you expect is for readers of your stuff to translate it into readable English. And if they have difficulty, you say it's *their* problem. That's not how CW/Morse Code works at all. People can follow my typing the first draft with no polishing turned into CW on air and yet you claim you can't follow it in text I don't think you've ever used CW on the air. How is that possible? Do you have an exaplintion why The level of difficulties for people in reading my stuff here in this newsgroup declines as support for code testing increases, indeedanywhere I post it seem that the abilty to read and understands declines with the degree of their agreement I frankly suspect that what the problem is, is simply that people like Dave and it seems you don't want to understand and therefore seize on any excuse not to do so I have no idea what that is supposed to mean. If you dispense with spelling, capitalization and punctuation, why post at all? Here's a theory, Dave: It's done to antagonize the reader. As a way for the writer to insult the reader, by saying the reader is unworthy of the effort required to write understandably. close Jim it is a reflection of the author opinion of the value of the medium, usenet is unworthy of the effort, but I have said that before "Usenet is unworthy of the effort"? That's a cop-out. What you're really saying is that the *people who read Usenet* aren't worthy of *your* effort. That's what it boils down to. Who wants to read the ramblings of an illiterate? The point is that you and others bother to read the gibberish and comment on it at length. and that is an intersting point So here's my final point: The hardware and software of Usenet don't care if you post clear prose or complete gibberish. Only the readers care. So you are saying the readers aren't worth it. That works both ways. Your posts aren't worth the effort it takes to read and decipher them, let alone answer them. So I won't. |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Use a Pool Cage As An Antenna? | Antenna | |||
| Question Pool vs Book Larnin' | Policy | |||
| The Pool | Policy | |||
| From the Extra question pool: The dipole | General | |||
| REQ:latest Ham University with curent tech pool willing to share?/sell cheep | Equipment | |||
Threaded Mode
