| |
In lugnet.org.us.michlug, Amy Hughes writes:
> May I suggest that MichLUG find a language snob to do proofreading?
AFAIAC you certainly may... :-) Were you planning on doing so? :-) If so, go
ahead. :-)
> It'd be awkward to offer my services, so may
> I volunteer Larry? :-)
No, you mayn't. :-) I tilt at too many windmills as it is. But thanks for
thinking of me, just the same. :-)
> Scott's meeting/show summaries are an informal tradition,
I kind of like the manifold ways he has of managing to mangle matters,
mayhap he should continue? :-)
> but things we put on
> our website or hand out at shows need more thorough editing, IMO.
All kidding aside (and it's *all* kidding up above), you do have a point.
|
|
| |
Larry & All,
> All kidding aside (and it's *all* kidding up above), you do have a point.
Ha ha. While we need some proof-reading on various subjects, such as the
website, this subject could have been dealt in a better manner.
Scott S.
--
|
|
| |
In lugnet.org.us.michlug, Scott E. Sanburn writes:
> Larry & All,
>
>
> > All kidding aside (and it's *all* kidding up above), you do have a point.
>
> Ha ha. While we need some proof-reading on various subjects, such as the
> website, this subject could have been dealt in a better manner.
Mebbe. But personally I enjoy your wrapups immensely and wouldn't change a
thing about them as posted here. They may well benefit from a review before
being preserved for posterity, but happily, one could argue that they'd lose
their charm.
Note that being a good writer (facile with words) does not imply being a
good communicator (using them in pleasing and innoffensive ways). I know
this as I have A at all times but not always B. :-)
|
|
|
