Forum Moderators: open
Then I got to the last paragraph. Reread it. And then reread it again. Then quite spontaneously burst out laughing. In a tone of frustration she asked "what?!"
The last paragraph was quite obviously not intended for publication but rather the last notes the reporter wrote to herself as a reminder to wind up the story with some whizbang ending. It reads:
"Need last ending graph, maybe something life 'And a new life of separation will begin.'
Unfortunately, she didn't finish the story the way she had intended and the editor either didn't read the story all the way through or was in too much of a hurry to even look.
Don't you just love small local papers? :)
One reference:
[home.earthlink.net...]
(last but one paragraph)
My what? ... my "breakfast cereal" perhaps leaned over to me? Pot calling kettle lorax! I think that post just prooves that third party proof reading or at least word grammar and spell checking is a requirement for all of us when writing copy of any kind.
One of my clients who proof read the website I created for them spoke to me recently, about a year after the site went live during which time it has been performing quite well generating enquiries for them. "Mark, the address on every page of the site, the building number is one out!" .. can you believe that .. yes unfortunately I can. Errors are able to creep into all sorts of places which is why proof reading came about.
Another, I love the way professional photographers often urge us all to use a professional because amateurs with digicams usually produce less than average results. Yes they are right although many "professional" photographers also produce average results (thats the statistical function of "average" :-). However the number of pro photographers who produce their own websites is on the rise, rather than paying a professional web site designer, they muse that they can do well enough.
Often they are quite right.
Except that apart from the asthetics of the site they often also show why a photographer generally accompanies a journalist.
It is expected a journalist should be able to spell and to craft a sentence. The photographers often proove with their own sites why they remain behind lense not keyboard.
One I looked at recently was so much worse than my first very amateur site, with spelling and grammar errors that made it so impossible to read, that I was reduced to laughter and to seriously wondering if it was a joke site.
Apparently it was not, it was the site they used to show proof images to their clients. Ouch.
I believe the word is 'proves' not 'prooves';)
(not having a go at you - just thought you'd appreciate the humour of the situation)
;)
... bugger... :)
~desperately looking for a mistake in 4eyes' post~
No periods.
Hehe, funny thing is, I started spending half of my time correcting errors in my data sources, not even my own!
SN
LOL - that's why I'm not an editor! :) That should be 'My wife.'
I was just appointed to be a moderator in another forum. The forum recently celebrated its first anniversary. Blah blah all the I was honored and excited to join the team stuff (not that it's not true, it's just not the point of the story) and I was surfing around the site to see if there were any tidbits I'd missed as a member that I should probably know as a moderator.
Well, in the forum's History page, it told the long saga of how the forum came to be, from its days in Yahoo! Groups etc., etc. and how finally it came to its current incarnation.
The founding date was listed as August 30, 2003.
...
They meant 2002. I dunno, I thought it was pretty funny. They did too, when I pointed it out. It's the things you know the best that you often make the silliest mistakes on.
I'm currently in the midst of the mindnumbing task of combing through my company's recently-released website and fixing the errors in the copy my boss helpfully inserted (the man cannot type).
[edited by: lawman at 1:19 pm (utc) on Sep. 16, 2003]
[edit reason] Snipped Political Commentary [/edit]
You appear to have forgotten the verb in your post.
;)
I guess it was too much to expect that I type that much without a smellcheker and get it right! :-) my smelling is awful :-)
I recently was amused to be at a small conference where papers were handed out, a bod in the front row peeped up very quickly, "which phone number on these papers is the right one?"
Turns out the UK government dept gave out a range of papers listing different office phone numbers on each.
The person who peeped had many years experience in PR so I guess he was used to checking details. He spotted it immediately, I was impressed, they were embarrassed :-)
4eyes gets the editor / proof readers job
What? and paint a target on my back.
I'd never dare psot agnia.
No thnaks
This was especially funny as the editor had told me they did all their proofreading in-house and didn't need to outsource any :).
A bit like many of my posts :)
Mack.
Sounds so likely.
