09-07-2012, 06:18 PM
Hi Stephen,
The entire post? What else needs correction? There was only that one mistake, no? If so, then I feel as if the point was clearly illustrated and relayed - I wouldn't think it something capable of throwing anyone for a loop. I'll change it, though.
Not to be contentious, I'm honestly not trying to be, but if the members are okay reading a lengthy post, why would we have to condense it? I now know that the topic may border on breaking the rules, but does the site have a character limit, as well? Again, I promise you I'm doing nothing more than trying to be precisely clear on what is and isn't an accepted method of writing on this forum. Is always attempting to turn 3 words into 1 a suggestion, or an all-out rule / command?
One thing I've learned by speaking with people online (and I can use examples from this exact topic) is that certain things need to be repeated. We're so caught up in our own mind, that we overlook what other members are truly trying to relay to us. I don't think one's typing style should be an exact science and additionally don't feel as if there's anything wrong in mentioning certain things once, twice or three times (or more) for that matter - and feel, that at times, it relays a point the third time that wasn't caught the first time around.
But just so we're on the same page from here on in, as my intention is to abide by the rules (stated or not), can you point out what's redundant? At least the first thing to pop in your head? So that I can have a good grasp of what it is you're talking about. You say "much", but I honestly don't see it. Help me out here.
In all honesty, this I didn't know. I'd only figured that out after I read the rules - should have read them before posting, I know.
And not to repeat myself, but if you look up, I'd mentioned how I would read the rules following a certain post above. Which I have done and now have a somewhat better (yet vague) understanding of what is and isn't allowed on here.
I would safely assume it's of absolute no relevance to our salvation, and although "necessary" is not quite the word I'd use, it's interesting conversation, nonetheless. Even Thirdwoe thought so.
Though that's entirely besides the point - I'll tread more carefully in the future. Apologies to both Shamasha Paul and you for breaking the rules this time around.
By the way, you can PM me your reply if you'd like.
Stephen Silver Wrote:I suggest that you proof-read your entire post and correct it where appropriate. Yo have Lazarus mixed up with the rich-man and visa versa.
The entire post? What else needs correction? There was only that one mistake, no? If so, then I feel as if the point was clearly illustrated and relayed - I wouldn't think it something capable of throwing anyone for a loop. I'll change it, though.
Stephen Silver Wrote:Read the entire post and ask yourself if you can some how find a way to condense it to a reasonable length. Much of your writing is repeated and redundant.
Not to be contentious, I'm honestly not trying to be, but if the members are okay reading a lengthy post, why would we have to condense it? I now know that the topic may border on breaking the rules, but does the site have a character limit, as well? Again, I promise you I'm doing nothing more than trying to be precisely clear on what is and isn't an accepted method of writing on this forum. Is always attempting to turn 3 words into 1 a suggestion, or an all-out rule / command?
One thing I've learned by speaking with people online (and I can use examples from this exact topic) is that certain things need to be repeated. We're so caught up in our own mind, that we overlook what other members are truly trying to relay to us. I don't think one's typing style should be an exact science and additionally don't feel as if there's anything wrong in mentioning certain things once, twice or three times (or more) for that matter - and feel, that at times, it relays a point the third time that wasn't caught the first time around.
But just so we're on the same page from here on in, as my intention is to abide by the rules (stated or not), can you point out what's redundant? At least the first thing to pop in your head? So that I can have a good grasp of what it is you're talking about. You say "much", but I honestly don't see it. Help me out here.
Stephen Silver Wrote:Moreover ask yourself if this topic is a theological one which as you know is not aceptable on the Forum.
In all honesty, this I didn't know. I'd only figured that out after I read the rules - should have read them before posting, I know.
And not to repeat myself, but if you look up, I'd mentioned how I would read the rules following a certain post above. Which I have done and now have a somewhat better (yet vague) understanding of what is and isn't allowed on here.
Stephen Silver Wrote:Both should ask yourselves "is thnis lengthy tgopic really necessary.
I would safely assume it's of absolute no relevance to our salvation, and although "necessary" is not quite the word I'd use, it's interesting conversation, nonetheless. Even Thirdwoe thought so.
Though that's entirely besides the point - I'll tread more carefully in the future. Apologies to both Shamasha Paul and you for breaking the rules this time around.
By the way, you can PM me your reply if you'd like.