|
wrote If something is worth writing, it's worth writing clearly. Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. 73, de Hans, K0HB |
an_old_friend wrote: wrote: wrote: cut dis dat Len, we could apply the null hypothesis. It could have been a disgruntled NCTA trying to make the PCTA look bad. But there's two problems with that hypothesis: a. The NCTA have nothing to be disgruntled about except a quarter century of arbitrary and unnecessary government regulation, and and right Now I can't see how NCTA can be disgruntled the only bothering me now is chopping at the bit wiating for it to be over Even my non Ham freinds have noticed the improvement in my often somewhat dower expression and dared asked me to explain that and I have have found myself breaking into song on the repeater stuff like that Stop right there. Even the slightest upturn at the corner of your mouth might be mistaken as gloating. b. The PCTA make themselves look bad without any help. OTOH they do even better by just making em SEE happy folks They'll form support groups to try to cope. |
roillng on the folor luaghnig my ass off
Ceehrs, Blil, KNU2K "KØHB" wrote in message nk.net... wrote If something is worth writing, it's worth writing clearly. Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. 73, de Hans, K0HB |
an old friend wrote: wrote: Dee Flint wrote: Nope but it isn't worth my time to compose if people aren't going to bother reading it. If I'm not going to take the time to do it reasonably well, I'm not going to bother at all. Well it is your choice but frankly I skip any message that takes extra effort to decipher. I keep my spell checker and grammar checker turned on at all times despite the fact that I received straight A's throughout elementary school, high school, and college in all the English classes (and related classes) that I took. Even with these aids turned on, I take time to look through my message and make sure that it is as clear as possible. I want people to read what I've written. Otherwise why bother to write anything? I agree 100% with Dee's ideas expressed above. If something is worth writing, it's worth writing clearly. When are you going to start writng clearly yourself? BBBWWWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHA ! ! ! ! ! You're such a card, Markie! Always the comedian! This doesn't mean we're all Shakespeares. It does mean we can at least do what we can to use correct spelling, grammar, punctuation and capitalization. Ok He says "ok", but my money's on "But I won't do a darned thing about it". An analogy: Suppose there are a group of hams who regularly QSO on VHF or UHF FM. Although they use different rigs, all have signals with "good audio" - clean, crisp, clear, easy to listen to and understand. Then a newcomer shows up, with a signal that has really poor audio. Muffled, distorted, very unclear. Not weak, off-frequency or over-deviating, just not clear. Varies from 'requires a careful listen' to 'completely impossible to understand'. Fortunately it is discovered that the problem lies in the microphone being used by the newcomer. It's the original that came with the rig, which is no longer made. Nothing wrong with the rig itself, it's the mike which is the problem. But the newcomer refuses to replace the microphone. Says it's too much trouble, costs too much money, and a new mike wouldn't be as easy to use as the old one. Plus he doesn't think his audio is all that bad in the first place. Newcomer finally says that if the group can't understand him, it's *their* problem, not his, and he shouldn't be expected to spend money, time and effort to get a new microphone for his rig. How should the group respond? One you you try analogy that is valid It's absolutely valid. you could also be man enough to say what you mean Seem's pretty straight forward to me. For example to addmto your analogy "addmto"...?!?! That's not even close to being a "word". It is only those that disgree with the newcomers views that find him so impossible to understand I don't always agree with Jim and it made perfect sence to me. It it also truns out not to be his mike but his voice that has problem "turns" and of course tell get off the air till you can fix your voice and of course Ham operators are so accepting Sure they are...Unless you're blatantly lying or deceiving. Like you, Lennie and Brainless. Steve, K4YZ |
K0HB:
Thanks, I learned something I didn't know, worked well for me! John On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 00:04:09 +0000, KØHB wrote: wrote If something is worth writing, it's worth writing clearly. Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. 73, de Hans, K0HB |
K4YZ wrote: an old friend wrote: wrote: Dee Flint wrote: Nope but it isn't worth my time to compose if people aren't going to bother reading it. If I'm not going to take the time to do it reasonably well, I'm not going to bother at all. Well it is your choice but frankly I skip any message that takes extra effort to decipher. I keep my spell checker and grammar checker turned on at all times despite the fact that I received straight A's throughout elementary school, high school, and college in all the English classes (and related classes) that I took. Even with these aids turned on, I take time to look through my message and make sure that it is as clear as possible. I want people to read what I've written. Otherwise why bother to write anything? I agree 100% with Dee's ideas expressed above. If something is worth writing, it's worth writing clearly. When are you going to start writng clearly yourself? BBBWWWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHA ! ! ! ! ! You're such a card, Markie! Always the comedian! Not realy but you can tell yourself that lie Jim wanders on and on to the point no one is quite sure what his point is This doesn't mean we're all Shakespeares. It does mean we can at least do what we can to use correct spelling, grammar, punctuation and capitalization. Ok He says "ok", but my money's on "But I won't do a darned thing about it". which is of course the same thing An analogy: Suppose there are a group of hams who regularly QSO on VHF or UHF FM. Although they use different rigs, all have signals with "good audio" - clean, crisp, clear, easy to listen to and understand. Then a newcomer shows up, with a signal that has really poor audio. Muffled, distorted, very unclear. Not weak, off-frequency or over-deviating, just not clear. Varies from 'requires a careful listen' to 'completely impossible to understand'. Fortunately it is discovered that the problem lies in the microphone being used by the newcomer. It's the original that came with the rig, which is no longer made. Nothing wrong with the rig itself, it's the mike which is the problem. But the newcomer refuses to replace the microphone. Says it's too much trouble, costs too much money, and a new mike wouldn't be as easy to use as the old one. Plus he doesn't think his audio is all that bad in the first place. Newcomer finally says that if the group can't understand him, it's *their* problem, not his, and he shouldn't be expected to spend money, time and effort to get a new microphone for his rig. How should the group respond? One you you try analogy that is valid It's absolutely valid. nope it isn't you could also be man enough to say what you mean Seem's pretty straight forward to me. For example to addmto your analogy "addmto"...?!?! That's not even close to being a "word". It is only those that disgree with the newcomers views that find him so impossible to understand I don't always agree with Jim and it made perfect sence to me. It it also truns out not to be his mike but his voice that has problem "turns" and of course tell get off the air till you can fix your voice and of course Ham operators are so accepting Sure they are...Unless you're blatantly lying or deceiving. Not lying or decieving you are lying and decieving in claiming to know the medcial state of a person you have never met You know this since you are an LPN Like you, Lennie and Brainless. Steve, K4YZ |
"KØHB" wrote in message nk.net... "Dee Flint" wrote But why be so stubborn about using a spell checker? Is your ego more important than your message? In defense of Mark...... On several ocassions here he has noted that his interface to rrap is via Google. Google doesn't provide a spell checking service. Get out of his case already! Beep beep de Hans, K0HB Normally I would have not commented except for the fact that he has also made the point several times that he is deliberately choosing not to in order to spite people. Even with Google, one could compose in a word processor and then cut and paste. Or a person could at least read through it a couple of times before hitting send. However, it doesn't particularly bother me as I exercise my option not to read the garbled ones. If he wishes to waste his time writing stuff that people won't read, that's his prerogative. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
Dee:
I like it when the girl plays hard to get, then acquiesces in the end, been movies made about that yanno!!! tongue-in-cheek John On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 21:59:32 -0400, Dee Flint wrote: "KØHB" wrote in message nk.net... "Dee Flint" wrote But why be so stubborn about using a spell checker? Is your ego more important than your message? In defense of Mark...... On several ocassions here he has noted that his interface to rrap is via Google. Google doesn't provide a spell checking service. Get out of his case already! Beep beep de Hans, K0HB Normally I would have not commented except for the fact that he has also made the point several times that he is deliberately choosing not to in order to spite people. Even with Google, one could compose in a word processor and then cut and paste. Or a person could at least read through it a couple of times before hitting send. However, it doesn't particularly bother me as I exercise my option not to read the garbled ones. If he wishes to waste his time writing stuff that people won't read, that's his prerogative. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
Dee Flint wrote: "K=D8HB" wrote in message nk.net... "Dee Flint" wrote But why be so stubborn about using a spell checker? Is your ego more important than your message? In defense of Mark...... On several ocassions here he has noted that his interface to rrap is via Google. Google doesn't provide a spell checking service. Get out of his case already! Ty Hans (trying to save Bandwidth by checking you both at once Beep beep de Hans, K0HB Normally I would have not commented except for the fact that he has also made the point several times that he is deliberately choosing not to in order to spite people. Even with Google, one could compose in a word processor and then cut and paste. Or a person could at least read through it a couple of times before hitting send. I could double or triple the time involved and again iif you aren't interested in reading posts feel free to ignore them You might not be my target audeince However, it doesn't particularly bother me as I exercise my option not to read the garbled ones. If he wishes to waste his time writing stuff that people won't read, that's his prerogative. =20 Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:48 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com