Posts by BenWilson
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Perhaps so, however the frustration was possibly felt on both sides of the particular debate
Not me. I don't get frustrated when people are unclear. I either ask or wait for clarity. Very often it's only me who's not getting it, so I don't really feel angry at the writer.
Which brings me to....
David
The person who put the sign up was doing you a favor. It's your choice if grammar is worth getting eaten by a shark for. I would be very grateful to see a sign like that, which could save my life, however incorrect it is. Of course I would rather see a long and detailed sign written in plain English, explaining the risk of sharks, the number of deaths recently, the alternatives, who the author of the sign was, etc. But if I'm walking down a beach in Indonesia thinking of having a dip, whoever the kind soul was that put the sign up has definitely not incurred any 'onus' of any kind. They've just saved my life.
-
gio, if you agree with what you now understand me to be saying then can we leave it at that?
Russell, I find I can't help it, most of the time. A comma that is not followed by a space just looks wrong, even though it's actually a waste of bytes. It's part of the reason I prefer not to text - it's just too damned slow.
-
David, it's not always the writer who wants something. I'd have thought that was obvious. When I read something I want to understand it. I'm not sitting there petulantly demanding that the writer pour the knowledge into my head. Like when I go to a beach and see a sign that says "Be ware of the sharks", the onus is on me to realize that the sign is not telling me to offer myself to the sharks as a tradeable item. Or if I want to buy a product and the manual is in Chinglish, that's not enough reason on it's own to say that there is no manual.
Gio, if you are not doing it, then what the hell are you arguing with me about?
-
Stephen, I'm glad you get what I'm saying, whether it was a thread-jack or not. I don't really think it was. I'm perfectly grateful to anyone who has assisted in putting up useful information about how to get your fonts right. I'm only arguing against the people who pigheadedly insist on it. To me, a mode of communication is not 'right or wrong', it's 'helpful or unhelpful', and it's the unhelpful stuff I don't hold with.
Paul, I'm pretty sure you get me. Stephen Fry appears to. I'm certainly not accusing anyone on this forum of being a pointless pedant. They may be advocating on their behalf, though. I'm advocating on the other behalf, the multitude of people who have things to say, which they say clearly, if imperfectly.
-
A reader has no responsibilities whatsoever
I disagree. There are a lot of responsibilities, like understanding the language, familiarity with the content domain, and maybe, just maybe, actually giving a damn about the message itself. Failure of any of these responsibilities is not on the writer. They don't have to translate every document they write into every possible language, nor do they have to explain jargon if the audience can be expected to understand the jargon. They certainly are not required to give a complete refresher course on the fundamentals of the subject, right back to primary school level. Nor do they have to resolve ambiguities that are not actually ambiguous.
-
you seem to be mistakenly thinking that the onus is on the reader to discover the writer's meaning.
And you seem to be asserting the contrary? That the onus is entirely on the writer?
I disagree. A great deal of communication is about trying to understand the other person's intent. If it is not well conveyed, that's the writer's fault, sure, but if you deliberately refuse to make an effort, that's your fault. Arbitrary rules being used as such an excuse, where no actual meaning was really lost, are a particularly annoying example of that.
In Craig's case, absolutely the onus is on him to go back to the IRD and ask what he doesn't get, because otherwise he'll be paying late, getting fined, etc. Perhaps he could hold their letter up in a court and show that the bill was not clear, but the absolute first question the other lawyer is going to ask is "Did you then seek clarification?". And whether he wins or not it will cost him.
-
gio, are you getting angry because you can't understand my point or you think I don't understand yours?
You're saying that deliberately refusing to use macrons when actually writing in Maori in a formal document that is meant to be used by many people, and has a long preparation time and multiple reviews, is culturally insensitive? If so, I agree.
Now, do you understand that I'm not even talking about the writer? I'm talking about the reader, and what responsibilities they have?
-
I don't want to pile on here
I want you to, though. No pile is complete without you.
I've said it a dozen times now, if the pedantry is about actual ambiguity or even conveying the opposite meaning, then getting picky is fine. You're well within your rights to demand explanation of what is unclear in the bill, and suggest improving the form (if it was a form) to help others who will probably struggle with it. But they're not going to let you off the bill because of missing macrons.
-
3410 I would never make that mistake.
Pinged! I never edit blog comments, well almost never, which was why I was sympathetic to Ben in the first instance.
Heh, I recall Russell getting bitter about getting pinged last week for some typos. I was sympathetic to him in that instance. It was a perfect example of someone being a dick about something to annoy the writer and avoid the content.
-
It rarely went down well.
I'll bet. The apostrophe-Nazi seemed to think the mantra "The apostrophe comes after the name of the owner or owners" conveyed all that needed to be known. When I pointed out that it is also used for contractions, she repeated the mantra, tore the work up, and cast it in the bin with what seemed like malicious pleasure.
Last ←Newer Page 1 … 897 898 899 900 901 … 1066 Older→ First