HomeWritersLiterary AgentsEditorsPublishersResourcesDiscussionWritersNet Email
Forum Login | Join the discussion
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Test results

  1. #1
    John Travis
    Guest

    Test results

    Hi group,
    I may well get flamed for this (so what else is new?), but I have conducted a little test in this forum for my own personal information. I have intentionally misspelled a word used by writers virtually every day on several occasions. Either no one has noticed it, or no one realized it was misspelled, or everyone was too nice to say anything about it (fat chance here). Very interesting.

    John



  2. #2
    Mike Campano
    Guest

    Re: Test results

    That's what editors are for....lol.



  3. #3
    R Scientist
    Guest

    Re: Test results

    You weren't attacking deathbed. If you were, he would have assaulted you for it.



  4. #4
    John Travis
    Guest

    Re: Test results

    Mike,

    LOL, you are exactly right. That's what editors are for. :-)

    RS,

    No, I do not attack ... defend if necessary, but never attack.

    John



  5. #5
    Mary Gibbs
    Guest

    Re: Test results

    I'll have to put myself in the "I didn't notice" camp. But to be honest, I haven't read very many postings.

    Pre-submission jitters. Novel # 2 is on its' way out the door!



  6. #6
    Writing Unto The Deathbed
    Guest

    Radio analogy

    Consider this analogy:

    In the 1910s and early 20s, radio technology was new. There were few commercial operators, but a lot of amateurs were using the new equipment, some of which they built themselves. Soon, however, big money moved into the technology and it became professionalized, with a high degree of standards. But small, amateur operators continued to broadcast--they still do, and we call them hams. They have little if any commercial impact. It is a hobby for them.

    Today, POD and e-book technology is new. There are few commercial operators, but a lot of amateurs using the new technology. Soon, however, big money will move into the technology and professionalize it, utilizing a high degree of standards. But small, amateur operators will continue to "publish," as they always have, either through self-publishing or vanity-publishing. These kinds of "authors" have always existed. They have had little if any commercial impact, and this will never change. For 99% of them, self-publication, either with a hand-press in the basement in 1920 or through POD in 2020, will remain a hobby. These are not real, legitimate, professional writers, and neither I nor anyone else in the profession will ever consider them such. Why? Because their impact is negligible.

    I believe that in the future the real writers like me will be offered POD and e-book advances in our contracts, the same way we get distinct clauses for paperback and audio-book. More money in our pockets. Meanwhile, amateur vanity people will continue to have to shell out to scammers for these "services."



  7. #7
    mark blanchard
    Guest

    Re: Radio analogy

    I, for one, live by a sort of Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy with regards to those kinds of errors in net forums. I do not spell check my posts, nor to I scrutinize any of the other posts for any typos, punctuation shortcomings, grammatical or syntactical errors. We're not creating literature here, we're just yapping over the virtual backyard fence. I am more than happy to let everyone misspell to their hearts' content.

    But I draw the line at anyone daring to use of the secondary definition (rather than the primary) for the word GAMBIT. If see anyone use it on these boards, I'll be on his back like Dr. Johnson on the last leg of roast mutton!

    Mark



  8. #8
    Benjamin Wretlind
    Guest

    Re: Radio analogy

    Mark, that sounds like a "gambit". :P

    Seriously, I'm sitting here with the OED in my lap (the condensed version--still unabridged, microprint, and about 50 pounds versus 20+ volumes). The word "gambit" is listed as having only one definition of the word, that being the chess move. The secondary the OED refers to is a combination of the word such as a "gambit-pawn" or "gambit-knight". Out of curiousity, I looked the same word up at www.m-w.com and found the second definition you are referring to: "a remark intended to start a conversation or make a telling point".

    Either way, don't get on my back. This is all in jest.

    Benjamin X. Wretlind



  9. #9
    John Travis
    Guest

    Re: Radio analogy

    Okay folks, enough is enough. For some time now, I have, in this forum, referred to "copyrite." I know full well that the proper spelling is "copyright." No one caught it. Big deal.

    John



  10. #10
    Writing Unto The Deathbed
    Guest

    Re: Radio analogy

    Anyone notice how I never attack Mark?



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts