Text 6906, 83 rader
Skriven 2006-08-24 21:43:00 av Robert E Starr JR (7403.babylon5)
Ärende: Re: Short STORIES by JMS
================================
* * * This message was from Mox Fulder to rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.m * * *
         * * * and has been forwarded to you by Lord Time * * *         
            -----------------------------------------------             

@MSGID: <12esraqi3lsp7a3@corp.supernews.com>
@REPLY:
<echvd30dj2@drn.newsguy.com><1156366572.545800.185080@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com><12eqaatbqo34m9a@corp.supernews.com><

On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 00:42:48 GMT, Amy Guskin <aisling@fjordstone.com> wrote:
[...]
> Firstly, some people care more about the content than the subject line -- 
> some people barely look at the subject line, if at all (I know that I don't -

> I simply click through all of the messages that are new).  Also, changing the

> subject line screws up the threading in some peoples' newsreaders.

I wish I had that kind of free time. The purpose of the subject line is to 
let the reader know whether the message is of interest and should be 
opened, or skipped. It takes less than a second to open one message, but 
there never is just one message, is there?

> Your second point is irrelevant.

Hardly. You brought up the native speaker issue, suggesting non-native 
speakers should get a free pass now and then. What's irrelevant to me is 
whether a poster is a native speaker, since many native speakers have 
horrible problems with spelling and grammar. You may or may not agree, 
but my response certainly is relevant to the issue you brought up.

> Thirdly, there's nothing wrong with correcting someone, but your tone was 
> really much nastier than was warranted, IMHO.  What you said:

That does not sound very humble to me.

> "Fix. The. F'ing. Subject. Line."

Here's the thing. That was one way of saying, "ugh! Enough already, 
people, can't anyone fix the subject line when they reply? This is 
like being stabbed in the eye. It's easy, see?"

Just a friendly jab among acquaintances. Nothing particularly nasty or 
profoundly evil about it.

My follow-up was not about the original poster, contrary to your 
assumption. It was about everyone else who replied without fixing the 
subject line.

As for the tone, I would agree it's not warm and fuzzy, but I would 
disagree with any characterization of any certainty. It's too short to 
read too much into it and get to any definitive conclusion.

> How I might have addressed it:

> "Stefan, I know you're not a native English speaker, so I'm hoping that this 
> correction is helpful to you: the plural of 'story' is actually 'stories' 
> rather than 'storys.' "  Or you could have simply started at "The plural of 
> 'story'..." if you weren't feeling chatty.

Like I said, the comment was not about the original poster. I simply 
followed-up to the most recent post with that subject line.

> So, it's not an issue with your having corrected someone -- really, I'm the 
> _last_ person who'd say that grammar/usage/spelling shouldn't be corrected.  
> And it's not about some people taking themselves too seriously.  As we've 
> discussed in this newsgroup before, on threads you've been a part of, it's 
> all about tact, and tone, and kindness.

You do realize this is all based on your assumption and personal 
interpretation that this was a "much nastier" comment. You have probably 
said things to close friends that, taken literally and out of context, 
would be incredibly rude. Yet, between you and your friend, it's nothing. 
I would suggest that along with being kind, we also take some distance 
from frivolous online comments, and maybe ask for clarification, if 
needed, before making too many assumptions.

-- 
20060824 2020
This .sig is not available at the moment. Leave your message after the beep.
                                                                               
                                            
--- SBBSecho 2.11-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)