The Progarchives site

Peter wrote: Thanks for the thoughtful response, Logan. I too have huge reservations about taking my work here (thus my longstanding decision not to be a moderator or such), but still, the habits that were ingrained during my education are a fundamental part of how I communicate in text now. I can't bear to let even the smallest spelling or punctuation error stand uncorrected in one of my posts -- assuming I spot it! (You'll find "edited by Peter" at the bottom of most of my posts -- my typing is crap.)     Re your last point (and the original poll topic), thanks for the smile. I really have no one priority for improving the site -- unless it were to dispense with the confusing, divisive notion of "prog" altogether....      PS: I corrected your spelling of RECOGNIZE with my spell check.     Take it easy, my friend.

I prefer to use the alternate "se" spelling; it's less commoner.  That said, consistency is important, and you will notice that my signature has "Magmatize & Progelytize the masses!" where I deliberately opted for the more common "ze" spelling.  A problem with spell-check can be that it doesn't offer alternate spellings, and it's one reason why I don't rely on it.  I'm a very good speller, but I am prone to typos when posting.  When I'm working, I'm meticulous, and it comes automatically.  Here, it's different, partially because I'm in a different mind-set, and also because I write better when using Word rather than these little post boxes -- even the full-reply editor is less than satisfying.  I should set it so I can see things properly (use super-big font), my ulcerated eyes are in very bad shape.

I used to be the same when it comes to having it ingrained in my education.  I used to be very precise, formal, well-structured, but then I moved to a soggy-bloggy writing style -- stream of diarrhoeic thought.  I tend to find such writing more of a pleasurable distraction; however, I would love to get back to writing for myself in the manner I once did.  Maybe it's time I tried my hand at writing plays or screenplays again -- I like the structure, but lack the time, brain-cells,  and patience these days.  It's stressful juggling children and work, and I love writing, but really miss having sufficient periods without distraction for the kind of writing that I enjoy most.

Grammar and spelling are important, but I'm more interested in the content of people's posts -- the ideas presented..., as well as the presentation of ideas.

Sorry for the digressions. This touches on something I said in my last post.  It is more stream-of-thought-stuff.  In regards to quoting, my big concern is when quoting is done in such a manner that context is lost.  I think it's important to read a whole post carefully, and see how it fits together, before picking it apart, else the message is lost.  Of course, one only need quote the salient bits, but one has to be very careful.  I do notice sometimes that when posts are dissected, and sometimes only parts of posts are quoted, the message/ intent/ thrust is lost.  On a related note; I think some people forget a basic when it comes to polite formal arguing - the principle of charity.  Put, or consider your "opponent's" argument in the strongest form possible.  That requires understanding what the person is trying to say.  One needs to focus on the ideas, and consider alternate approaches....  Consider; don't just dismiss -- explore the grey areas.