 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> OTOH, no machine is ever going to spot mistakes such as "had" instead of
>> "head". :-/
>
> Well, that's down to you to check. Just read it thoroughly about 5 times
> or more.
Unfortunately, once you've read something once, the second time you're
not really "reading" it, you're just *remembering* what it says. (Or
what you ment it to say.) Gotta get a seperate party to read it if you
want real results.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
At least WordPerfect had this additional feature called Grammatik that'd
check the grammar of your document in addition to spelling, and that would
pick up errors like that (and whether you're using passive or active voice,
et cetera).
--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.freesitespace.net
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Cook wrote:
> At least WordPerfect had this additional feature called Grammatik that'd
> check the grammar of your document in addition to spelling, and that
> would pick up errors like that (and whether you're using passive or
> active voice, et cetera).
Word has a "grammer check" feature that tells you almost every sentence
is structured wrong and suggests that you rephrase it to sound like
Master Yoda. (E.g., change "this is going to be a problem" to "a problem
to be this is".) I never use that feature. ;-)
In short, nothing I've seen reliably replaces a human proof-reader.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Eero Ahonen wrote:
> Even though, send it. 80% good application is always better than unsent one.
And an 80% good application sent means that you can't send a 98% good
one later. :-/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Well, I got my CV finalised, and wrote *a* letter, but... man, it's
> taken me all afternoon! And it's *still* not that great... Jesus I suck
> at this! :-(
I am really not enjoying my day at work today. Once again I find myself
wanting to just pack it in right now.
On the other hand, I don't have another job to go to. And much as I'd
like to end up working for this other company [one of the few people who
seem to be trying to recruit large numbers of trainee staff], I'm scared
and apprehensive about actually contacting them. But if I don't, I'll be
trapped here for the rest of my life.
Rock and a hard place, eh? :-(
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Invisible [mailto:voi### [at] dev null]
> Rock and a hard place, eh? :-(
No, rock and a great opportunity for you :-)
Of course, I'm not one to talk, being in a similar situation. I've
known about another job for about 3 months, but I haven't put together
my resume or contacted them or anything yet. It'd be a longer commute,
but they pay quite a bit better, and I'm 90% certain I'd enjoy the job
more. So, why haven't I done anything yet...
...Ben Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Rock and a hard place, eh? :-(
>
> No, rock and a great opportunity for you :-)
>
> Of course, I'm not one to talk, being in a similar situation. I've
> known about another job for about 3 months, but I haven't put together
> my resume or contacted them or anything yet. It'd be a longer commute,
> but they pay quite a bit better, and I'm 90% certain I'd enjoy the job
> more. So, why haven't I done anything yet...
Yeah *you*, why haven't you done anything??
[pokes you]
The thing is, the guys I'm looking at seemingly have a stack of graduate
opportunities, all slightly different. I can't see one specific job in
their list where I tick *all* of the boxes. But given that I'm the sort
of nutcase who is likely to open up Wikipedia and learn about active
power factor correction JUST FOR THE HELL OF IT (!), it would seem that
I would be emminently suited to these kinds of jobs - even if I don't
know all the necessary theory right this second. I have the power to
learn it, and that surely is what counts.
Now, how the **** do I tell them that? (Especially given that they seem
to want you to apply using an online application process where you
specify a specific job you're applying for, and there doesn't seem to be
a way to contact a human about this.) I think if I could just persuade
them to interview me and talk to me, they could probably find something
useful to employ me for. But how?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> OTOH, no machine is ever going to spot mistakes such as "had" instead of
> "head". :-/
That would be the point of the grammar checker. Not quite as robust as the
spelling checker, mind.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
There aren't any trees on Mars.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 12-Jan-09 11:18, Invisible wrote:
> Tim Cook wrote:
>> At least WordPerfect had this additional feature called Grammatik
>> that'd check the grammar of your document in addition to spelling, and
>> that would pick up errors like that (and whether you're using passive
>> or active voice, et cetera).
>
> Word has a "grammer check" feature that tells you almost every sentence
> is structured wrong and suggests that you rephrase it to sound like
> Master Yoda. (E.g., change "this is going to be a problem" to "a problem
> to be this is".) I never use that feature. ;-)
>
> In short, nothing I've seen reliably replaces a human proof-reader.
Today I was writing a somewhat formal piece. On some words my open
office complained that I should perhaps rephrase because it was 'written
language', hmm, yes, what exactly do you think am I doing? Other words
that I regularly use are apparently 'Belgian Dutch'. What I normally do
is leave the check on and see if I agree, sometimes it is right and
sometimes it is plain silly,
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 12-Jan-09 17:14, Invisible wrote:
>>> Rock and a hard place, eh? :-(
>>
>> No, rock and a great opportunity for you :-)
>>
>> Of course, I'm not one to talk, being in a similar situation. I've
>> known about another job for about 3 months, but I haven't put together
>> my resume or contacted them or anything yet. It'd be a longer commute,
>> but they pay quite a bit better, and I'm 90% certain I'd enjoy the job
>> more. So, why haven't I done anything yet...
>
> Yeah *you*, why haven't you done anything??
>
> [pokes you]
>
> The thing is, the guys I'm looking at seemingly have a stack of graduate
> opportunities, all slightly different. I can't see one specific job in
> their list where I tick *all* of the boxes. But given that I'm the sort
> of nutcase who is likely to open up Wikipedia and learn about active
> power factor correction JUST FOR THE HELL OF IT (!),
Well you are also the kind of guy that is *in* wikipedia, not many
people that will apply for a job there can say that. Actually... perhaps
better if you don't mention it. Or, the internet being what it is, shall
we promote you to a full article including some remarks that may even
help you in getting a job? We do have stuff enough I would say ;)
> it would seem that
> I would be emminently suited to these kinds of jobs - even if I don't
> know all the necessary theory right this second. I have the power to
> learn it, and that surely is what counts.
>
> Now, how the **** do I tell them that? (Especially given that they seem
> to want you to apply using an online application process where you
> specify a specific job you're applying for, and there doesn't seem to be
> a way to contact a human about this.) I think if I could just persuade
> them to interview me and talk to me, they could probably find something
> useful to employ me for. But how?
You apply for just one of the jobs, preferable one that might suit you,
and during the interview they will find out which one actually does fit.
If there is a lot of jobs open they will in every interview consider
all jobs.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
