[MR] pennsic independent

[Siegfried]

I also believe that it was just in jest.  I know that they have been 
ribbed a bit before about having errors in the paper.  (Hey, they are 
volunteers trying to put out a daily paper!)   And I think that this was 
a gentle ribbing back at those folks, that was perhaps misinterpretted 
as them intentionally causing errors.

Siegfried


Becky Day wrote:
> Yes.  I didn't bring copies of the paper home, but as I recall, one of the
> later editions claimed to have some ridiculously high number of errors - I
> think it was a joke.  However, there were a lot of errors in every edition,
> so I can understand why people might have thought the 'contest' was legit.
> 
> Margret
> 
> 
> On 8/9/08 1:30 PM, "David Wendelken" <david_wendelken at nc.rr.com> wrote:
> 
>>>    TWO - An early issue claimed 144 errors. That's an acceptable number
>>> for a paper the size of the PI, but 1066 intentioonal errors?  That's
>>> a bit excessive.  The problem I have with it is that more and more
>>> publications these days have more and more errors that AREN'T
>>> intentional and I find that level of poor grammar, spelling and
>>> punctuation a sad commentary on both the quality of these periodicals
>>> and papers and an even sadder commentary on the quality of our current
>>> educational standards.
>> How many errors did you say?
>>
>> 144?  That's gross. :)
>>
>> 1066?  Perhaps they were a bit hastings with the editing. :)
>>
>> Think they might be pulling someone's leg?  I do.
>>
>> andras salamandra
>>
>>
> 
> 
> ========================================================================
>                    The Merry Rose Tavern at Cheapside
>     List Info: http://merryrose.atlantia.sca.org/
>   Submissions: Atlantia at atlantia.sca.org
> Subscriptions: http://seahorse.atlantia.sca.org/mailman/listinfo/atlantia