in reply to Re^2: Grammarians: do we need a new group?
in thread Grammarians: do we need a new group?

So you think we should create a team of people who send /msgs whenever they see a grammar mistake? Sounds like a fantastic way to drive away visitors. It might even work for me. Was that your intent? ;)

- tye        

  • Comment on Re^3: Grammarians: do we need a new group?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Grammarians: do we need a new group?
by ptum (Priest) on Jan 09, 2007 at 15:41 UTC

    Personally, I appreciate the time and interest expended when someone corrects one of my posts for grammar or spelling (or logical weakness), especially if it is done in a gracious or lighthearted manner. I doubt that we need a formalized group for such things -- I think there already are a few monks out there who will /msg if they notice a blatant error which detracts from the effectiveness of a node.

[reply]
Re^4: Grammarians: do we need a new group?
by swampyankee (Parson) on Jan 09, 2007 at 16:19 UTC

    To both questions, the answer is "no".

    emc

    At that time [1909] the chief engineer was almost always the chief test pilot as well. That had the fortunate result of eliminating poor engineering early in aviation.

    —Igor Sikorsky, reported in AOPA Pilot magazine February 2003.
[reply]

      What would such a group do?

      my method would be to /msg them

      So you think we should create a team of people who send /msgs whenever they see a grammar mistake?

      no

      And 'round in a circle we have gone. So we have yet to hear an answer to "What would such a group do?" Did you have a point to your proposal, and if you did, would you care to share it with the rest of the class? :)

      - tye        

[reply]

In Section Perl Monks Discussion