On 10/17/05, Geoff Burling llywrch@agora.rdrop.com wrote:
The point of my email was to focus on the problem, not the person; that is why I snipped off the identifying details. But since you raised that issue, I'll say this. I was under the impression that the original poster (OP) was a native English speaker, based on the idiomatic fluency of his language. Add to that the fact that the OP often makes a logical & plausible argument for his opinions, & this blemish of typos & misspellings is just a shame. If he's not a native speaker of English, he's fooling me now, & would fool me even better if he did just a little more work.
Had this person been another, run-of-the-mill whiner sending us another forgettable "I've been banned by a rogue Admin who picks on me because I violated the 3RR rule, but I won't mention it because that would make me look like the loon I am" email, I wouldn't bother making the effort; at most, I'd adjust the settings on my computer & make his email go bye-bye.
I'm trying to offer constructive criticism here. My message was "you could be a more effective writer if you did these things", not "your lack of grammar & spelling cancels out anything you might have to say; now go away." I'm sorry if that was not how it was received.
Geoff
Your quotes writen by two different people. The one with the spelling errors is mine. You are correct in thinking that english is my native language. The spelling issue is largely to do with dyslexia. Correcting my spelling tends to be very time consuming so I tend tend not to worry too much about it outside the article namespace.
-- geni