Okay. Hello everyone. I'm a creepy lurker who has been drifting from thread to thread for a very long time, and now I've finally decided to just suck it up and actually start an account and post something.
I'm very nervous.
But, um, for lack of a better forum topic (I'd rather avoid the neat enderverse discrepancy I've found, just because hundreds of others already have), I decided to just post one tiny, little correction about OSC's latest reviews everything.
I believe that Schwarzenegger said that gay marriage should be between a man and a woman. Which is, according to the standards of the book OSC was reviewing, pretty dumb, as gay marraige is, by definition, for two people of the same-sex. It was not a bashing of people against gay marriage.
That is all. Now I will finish, and leave my swamp of commas behind, and stop obsessing about them. <sigh>
Posted by Dogbreath (Member # 11879) on :
There have been a number of comments on this at the rhino times website, but yeah, the Schwarzenegger quote is "I think that gay marriage should be between a man and a woman." Whether that's the way it's printed in the book or not is another matter - it could be a number of things.
1)The book misprinted, accidentally leaving out the gay.
2) (most likely) OSC misread the quote.
3) OSC read the quote correctly, but he took offense to it being in the book regardless, and commented on it.
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
...And another review devolves into a political rant. Wheeee.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sterling: ...And another review devolves into a political rant. Wheeee.
Posted by Xann. (Member # 11482) on :
Hey Emreecheek, while this thread is heading no where, want to have a comma fight?
Posted by Dogbreath (Member # 11879) on :
comma comma comma comma commie! (ha ha! I have politically subverted your comma fight!)
Posted by Emreecheek (Member # 12082) on :
Why,yes, Xann, I do believe quite wholeheartedly that a comma fight would be fun, provided that said provided political subversion, confusing comma and commie, does not interrupt, and by interrupt I mean continue past its intital post, as I don't really believe that the first post should count, having only been interrupting a one-sided comma war at the time, our comma war too badly.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
quote:Fact-checking. Proofreading. These are worth doing, folks. Full employment for copy editors!
Good advice and clearly something Card should have done himself before printing this rant.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
The Rabbit: Have you noticed that in forums whenever somebody points out grammatical mistakes in another person's posts, that invariably somebody points out a grammatical mistake in the complainers statement?
It seems to me (and that's not saying much) that Mr. Card's mistake in reading the quote about Arnold was that he probably failed to see the word 'gay' in the quotation, or perhaps the word was actually absent in the final copy. Having seen the quotation as it was actually said I think Mr. Card like most would get the irony.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:The Rabbit: Have you noticed that in forums whenever somebody points out grammatical mistakes in another person's posts, that invariably somebody points out a grammatical mistake in the complainers statement?
The Rabbit may not have, but I have. Do a search for Davidson's Law on this forum. Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: The Rabbit: Have you noticed that in forums whenever somebody points out grammatical mistakes in another person's posts, that invariably somebody points out a grammatical mistake in the complainers statement?
I have noticed this. However I see a distinction between Davidson's Law and what Card did in his review. I think complaining about minor grammar errors on an internet forum is nearly always bad manners. Its like correcting a friends grammar in casual conversation. That opinion has been reinforced by my observation that people are most likely to start pointing out grammar and spelling mistakes when they are loosing an argument.
But there should be different standards for published work. It's fair and reasonable when reviewing a published work to criticize the author for failing to check facts and proofread carefully. But if you are going to publish that criticism in review, you are pretty hypocritical not to have checked the facts in that same review. It would have taken card less than 5 seconds to google the quote before publishing it. It was sloppy work.
quote:It seems to me (and that's not saying much) that Mr. Card's mistake in reading the quote about Arnold was that he probably failed to see the word 'gay' in the quotation, or perhaps the word was actually absent in the final copy. Having seen the quotation as it was actually said I think Mr. Card like most would get the irony.
Almost certainly true and I did not mean to imply anthing else. I suppose there is the off chance that Card deliberately stripped the quote so he could have another chance to rant about gay marriage but it would seem awfully uncharitable to make that kind of accusation without more evidence.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:That opinion has been reinforced by my observation that people are most likely to start pointing out grammar and spelling mistakes when they are loosing an argument.
Oh, yeah? Well, you can't spell "losing!" Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
Somebody had to do it, I guess.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
Well you missed antthing Tom, what kind an editor are you any way?
Posted by umberhulk (Member # 11788) on :
Post an emoticon/smiley should qualify as a grammar mistake.
Posted by C3PO the Dragon Slayer (Member # 10416) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: Oh, yeah? Well, you can't spell "losing!"
This... is... surreal...
That's the third time TODAY I've seen someone misspell "lose" or some variation on it, and either correct it myself or witness someone else do it.
The first was on the English exam I took today. The second was in a Game Maker manual. And now this...
Posted by Clumpy (Member # 8122) on :
It's should get harder and harder to get indignant about an OSC rant the longer you read the site. And this is far, far from the worst one. It's fair to say he projects his assumptions and viewpoints pretty heavily on the artists and writers he critiques .
The only one that really stuck in my craw is that it's still pretty stupid to spell "potato" incorrectly no matter what you see on an index card!
Posted by Tara (Member # 10030) on :
I think we'd all be better off reading 101 Things You Didn't Know About Jane Austen.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
.