User talk:Guido/Wishlist/Part 4: Difference between revisions

User talk:Guido/Wishlist/Part 4 (view source)

Revision as of 15:24, 30 October 2006

3,128 bytes added , 30 October 2006

m

On the use of talk pages

Geyser

Administrators

5,391

edits

@@ Line 20: / Line 20: @@
 ::[[User:Geyser|geyser]] 21:13, 28 October 2006 (CEST)
-I have been through it already twice. There's nothing you have to worry about, here. And I really appreciate both your review and commentary for their deep insight. They don't miss a clue. Unfortunately I fear replying to you in a decent way is going to take me a while. So I wonder whether it wouldn't be better to add a short essay (for your pleasure). Please, do not humiliate me with the English issues, as I am the first one who acknowledges them. Moreover I always have to confront with Microsoft Word automatic grammar check.  But this is another story...
+:I have been through it already twice. There's nothing you have to worry about, here. And I really appreciate both your review and commentary for their deep insight. They don't miss a clue.
-I do know how to be precise (aand when I say precise I say self-consistent), but in a creative process I prefer playing with riddles and with your curiosity.:)
 ::[[User:Guido|Guido]] 23:45, 28 October 2006 (CEST)
+:Thanks. Can I expect [[User_talk:Guido/Wishlist/Part 1|These]] [[User_talk:Guido/Wishlist/Part 2|Other]] [[User_talk:Guido/Wishlist/Part 3|Three]] to get your attention in the near future? ;)
+::[[User:Geyser|geyser]] 16:24, 30 October 2006 (CET)
+:Unfortunately I fear replying to you in a decent way is going to take me a while. So I wonder whether it wouldn't be better to add a short essay (for your pleasure).
+::[[User:Guido|Guido]] 23:45, 28 October 2006 (CEST)
+:Anything you like. Don't reply for the sake of replying : that's not the point of the talk. The point is to "adopt, adapt and improve". As long as we bear that in mind, anything goes.
+::[[User:Geyser|geyser]] 16:24, 30 October 2006 (CET)
+:Please, do not humiliate me with the English issues, as I am the first one who acknowledges them.
+::[[User:Guido|Guido]] 23:45, 28 October 2006 (CEST)
+:I don't ''mean'' to dwell on grammar/vocabulary. I try to go beyond the problem and make the content better.
+:So when I say such-and-such is improper, I'm merely saying : let's replace it with something proper and that's it!
+:When I suggest alternative sentences for a character to say, I mean you to take it, or generate something in return, and then ''merge it in''.
+:We're not supposed to talk forever, let alone to nitpick each other's grammar (my English is far from perfect). We're supposed to build.
+:Did you notice what I did to the [[User_talk:Guido/Wishlist/Part 2|actual scene]]? Your wishlist is imperfect ''but'' it's dynamic. It ''should'' live.
+:I won't mind if you edit everything in-place and delete every trace of "English issues". I ''encourage'' you to do so.
+:Post. Post raw, heck, post ''Italian''.
+:Auto-spellcheck. Update.
+:Auto-check grammar (careful with those, BTW...). Update.
+:Compare with Google or Babelfish translation (just in case). Update.
+:Take in remarks by peers. Merge, update.
+::[[User:Geyser|geyser]] 16:24, 30 October 2006 (CET)
+:Moreover I always have to confront with Microsoft Word automatic grammar check.  But this is another story...
+::[[User:Guido|Guido]] 23:45, 28 October 2006 (CEST)
+:The spellchecker starts explaining things like "musk". In those cases, even the lamest translator Google is a better friend (the best friend you can get is, of course, a dictionary).
+::[[User:Geyser|geyser]] 16:24, 30 October 2006 (CET)
+:I do know how to be precise (and when I say precise I say self-consistent), but in a creative process I prefer playing with riddles and with your curiosity. :)
+::[[User:Guido|Guido]] 23:45, 28 October 2006 (CEST)
+:That's not something I'd recommend, mainly because of the actual imprecisions (vocabulary etc) it cumulates with.
+:If we were all telepaths (or Italians), I believe we'd enjoy ourselves tremendously.
+:Because then your very understatements and ambiguities would be absolutely precise.
+:Right now, how should I say, the overall effect is not exactly that of a riddle session...
+:And you're not exactly playing with my curiosity when you give me "musk" or "crusty" and then have me wonder about "wheeze"...
+:You are free to leave certaing things out of the scope, but whatever you ''choose'' to focus on, precision should be ''there''.
+:"siding a collapsed highway", "drawing water with an old tank" ... Can you hear my head exploding? Please do something about that.
+:''Be on the lookout'' for false friends, for whatever can generate (unwanted) confusion rather than (wanted) ambiguity.
+:Again, I'd strongly encourage you to say ''more'' rather than ''less''. As I said, "whenever it's at all possible". Whenever it doesn't hurt your sense of understatement.
+::[[User:Geyser|geyser]] 16:24, 30 October 2006 (CET)
 ----