Ark Hotel & Pub

[PeterRS]

1 hour ago, Keithambrose said:

Interestingly, I find that even if you do check, as I do, some mistakes  can still get through, indeed  in my txt above,  'ot' instead of 'not'!

I use predictive text when i write word documents. Frequently I find that words have not come out the way I typed them. But I find that out by checking and then I can make the relevant corrections. Typing, especially on a phone, will always have some mistakes but I still think even a quick check on what appears on the screen can correct almost all of them.

[Keithambrose]

3 hours ago, PeterRS said:

I use predictive text when i write word documents. Frequently I find that words have not come out the way I typed them. But I find that out by checking and then I can make the relevant corrections. Typing, especially on a phone, will always have some mistakes but I still think even a quick check on what appears on the screen can correct almost all of them.

I think the important point, is "almost all of them". When I was working, we always said, don't proof read your own document.  

[caeron]

 

This is called "Thread Necromancy" in other forums. A poster finds a very old post or thread and posts to it. This 'resurrects' the thread from the dead (where it should have remained)

It is generally considered poor form. Better to start a brand new thread asking about the topic. 

Though in fairness, when perusing forums someone may not notice how old the thread actually is. Forums like this one that have been around for a very long time can have some very old threads lying around.

 

[Olddaddy]

2 hours ago, caeron said:

Thread Necromancy

I can't find that words  listed , but I may say very beautiful description 👍🏿

[PeterRS]

6 hours ago, Keithambrose said:

I think the important point, is "almost all of them". When I was working, we always said, don't proof read your own document.  

Don't self-proof it before it goes to an official proof reader? That seems nuts to me. It basically means you take no responsibility for what you have written. It's the proof reader who gets the blame. No company I have worked for - and I am not a lawyer - would expect an individual NOT to proof his own work before it was fed on to someone else. 

[mauRICE]

6 hours ago, caeron said:

Forums like this one that have been around for a very long time can have some very old threads lying around.

Just like some of its members. 😒🤷

[mauRICE]

8 hours ago, Keithambrose said:

When I was working, we always said, don't proof read your own document.  

Was working? You haven't retired, have you? 

[PeterRS]

8 hours ago, caeron said:

Forums like this one that have been around for a very long time can have some very old threads lying around.

All the more reason for threads to have a limited shelf life before being trashed. This is especially true in the present case when talking about a hotel that has clearly transformed itself since the OP was written all those years ago. A number of posters do make decisions based on other members' recommendations. Recommending a hotel after nearly 13 years is a disservice to others, especially those who have joined more recently. 

[Olddaddy]

6 hours ago, mauRICE said:

Was working? You haven't retired, have you? 

Some people just won't retire , I often wonder why 

🤔 

[Keithambrose]

7 hours ago, mauRICE said:

Was working? You haven't retired, have you? 

Mostly. Just kept the one client,  so I can travel to Amsterdam!

[Keithambrose]

8 hours ago, PeterRS said:

Don't self-proof it before it goes to an official proof reader? That seems nuts to me. It basically means you take no responsibility for what you have written. It's the proof reader who gets the blame. No company I have worked for - and I am not a lawyer - would expect an individual NOT to proof his own work before it was fed on to someone else. 

It was a rule in my firm.  If you proof read your own document,  you miss more things than if it's read by someone  else. Don't know why that happens, but it does. Your comment  about the proof reader getting the blame is wrong, it remains your document,  and your responsibility!

[PeterRS]

2 hours ago, Keithambrose said:

Your comment  about the proof reader getting the blame is wrong, it remains your document,  and your responsibility!

Hence the advisability of proof reading your own document - for errors and mistakes - before it goes to a professional who presumably was there primarily to make sure of the sense and appropriateness of the document in terms of the business  I still find it hard to believe that any company of any size in any business would expect that  proof reader to correct simple errors of spelling and grammar.

[Keithambrose]

2 hours ago, PeterRS said:

Hence the advisability of proof reading your own document - for errors and mistakes - before it goes to a professional who presumably was there primarily to make sure of the sense and appropriateness of the document in terms of the business  I still find it hard to believe that any company of any size in any business would expect that  proof reader to correct simple errors of spelling and grammar.

Well, there you are!

[Olddaddy]

8 hours ago, Keithambrose said:

It was a rule in my firm.  If you proof read your own document,  you miss more things than if it's read by someone  else. Don't know why that happens, but it does. Your comment  about the proof reader getting the blame is wrong, it remains your document,  and your responsibility!

 as a former work colleague used to say to every conversation 

" Oh very interesting my dear fellow , very interesting indeed ! 

[mauRICE]

25 minutes ago, Olddaddy said:

 as a former work colleague used to say to every conversation 

" Oh very interesting my dear fellow , very interesting indeed ! 

And you obviously didn't get the hint. He was brushing you off! 🤣