Re: how we read oops

Subject: Re: how we read oops
From: Karen Kay <karenk -at- NETCOM -dot- COM>
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 15:09:46 -0800

Glen Accardo said:
> I haven't read Robert Bohle's message yet, but I did save it to read
> later. Exactly what are we becoming when we actively chase someone
> off the list?

Glen, maybe you should have looked at Robert's message before you
commented on it. The fact that his paper is difficult to read without
reformatting has nothing to do with his leaving the list. He's leaving the
list because his research is done.

I was very disappointed in Robert's paper--I ended up deleting it because
I couldn't read it. And this is a topic in which I am very interested.

> The message seemed to be rather appropriate material,
> who cares if the line breaks aren't perfect?

It wasn't just the line breaks, it was the extraneous characters that did
it for me.

> We need to get to the
> point where we deal with minor annoyances as minor annoyances, and
> not as life-threatening dangers.

They are not life-threatening, but I won't read stuff that gives me a

> I say, if Robert Bohle can show me a thing or two about how people
> read, he can certainly be a valuable contributor to a list that
> pretends to be about writing better.

I find this statement ironic in that I *couldn't* read his paper--he
demonstrated a lot of reading difficulties of various types, though
perhaps unintentionally.

karenk -at- netcom -dot- com

Previous by Author: Re: Moderate techwr-l?
Next by Author: Re: how we read oops
Previous by Thread: Re[2]: how we read oops
Next by Thread: Re: how we read oops

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads