E
Edward Dolan
Guest
Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
> > Tom, I will not read posts like those. The poster has
> > obviously taken no pains at all with his post and it
> > shows nothing but contempt for the reader. It is not a
> > style, it is a total lack of style.
>
> Ed,
>
> There are many Internet postings that are obviously by
> people who have no skill at writing and lack understanding
> of the basic rules of grammar and punctuation, but the
> post by G. Daniels I referenced is different. It is like
> conversing with a schizophrenic person whose sense of
> reality differs from other peoples.
Yes, you are right about his mental processes. I have
encountered gobbledygook like this all my life in the
library world. We call them crackpots and try our darnedest
not to become like them, an ever present danger when you are
a wordsmith. What is lacking in such people is a discipline
of the mind. They can often be quite intelligent but their
intelligence is uncontrolled. It is like a force of nature.
>
> > I often debate with myself how much I should polish my
> > posts. You fast reach a point of diminishing returns. If
> > I were writing for publication I would of course take
> > infinite pains to get the flow just right.
> >
> > I do note that your posts are quite well written. Have
> > you worked at this I wonder or does it just come
> > naturally?...
>
> In the consulting engineering business, what the clients
> are paying for is a "deliverable" - a written document
> that contains not only data but also recommendations. It
> is vital for these documents to be intelligible to the
> client (or they will find another consulting firm). Of
> similar importance is that the writing be definitive
> enough in its meaning so that a lawyer would have a hard
> time convincing a judge or jury that the interpretation is
> something other than what engineer was intending to say.
>
> Sometimes I feel that it is unfair for me to argue in a
> written forum with those who do not write professionally
> for a living.
I keep forgetting that you are not "just" an engineer and
scientist. Your writing far surpasses that of most engineers
and scientists I have ever read. Obviously, practice makes
perfect. But I can always separate form from substance - and
you are far from perfect when it comes to substance.
Nevertheless, good writing contributes greatly to clear
thinking. I have always held to the belief that if you can't
say it (or write it), then you don't know it. Sometimes I
think that is what most of us are doing here on these
newsgroups like ARBR, trying to articulate our thoughts by
writing them out.
Regards,
Ed Dolan - Minnesota
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
> > Tom, I will not read posts like those. The poster has
> > obviously taken no pains at all with his post and it
> > shows nothing but contempt for the reader. It is not a
> > style, it is a total lack of style.
>
> Ed,
>
> There are many Internet postings that are obviously by
> people who have no skill at writing and lack understanding
> of the basic rules of grammar and punctuation, but the
> post by G. Daniels I referenced is different. It is like
> conversing with a schizophrenic person whose sense of
> reality differs from other peoples.
Yes, you are right about his mental processes. I have
encountered gobbledygook like this all my life in the
library world. We call them crackpots and try our darnedest
not to become like them, an ever present danger when you are
a wordsmith. What is lacking in such people is a discipline
of the mind. They can often be quite intelligent but their
intelligence is uncontrolled. It is like a force of nature.
>
> > I often debate with myself how much I should polish my
> > posts. You fast reach a point of diminishing returns. If
> > I were writing for publication I would of course take
> > infinite pains to get the flow just right.
> >
> > I do note that your posts are quite well written. Have
> > you worked at this I wonder or does it just come
> > naturally?...
>
> In the consulting engineering business, what the clients
> are paying for is a "deliverable" - a written document
> that contains not only data but also recommendations. It
> is vital for these documents to be intelligible to the
> client (or they will find another consulting firm). Of
> similar importance is that the writing be definitive
> enough in its meaning so that a lawyer would have a hard
> time convincing a judge or jury that the interpretation is
> something other than what engineer was intending to say.
>
> Sometimes I feel that it is unfair for me to argue in a
> written forum with those who do not write professionally
> for a living.
I keep forgetting that you are not "just" an engineer and
scientist. Your writing far surpasses that of most engineers
and scientists I have ever read. Obviously, practice makes
perfect. But I can always separate form from substance - and
you are far from perfect when it comes to substance.
Nevertheless, good writing contributes greatly to clear
thinking. I have always held to the belief that if you can't
say it (or write it), then you don't know it. Sometimes I
think that is what most of us are doing here on these
newsgroups like ARBR, trying to articulate our thoughts by
writing them out.
Regards,
Ed Dolan - Minnesota
