47f7dabb$1@news.povray.org...
>>> OK, now you're just describing *me*. :-(
>
>> I thought about including a disclaimer that 'any resemblance to a p.o-t 
>> regular or mascot is purely a coincidence' but decided against it.
>
> Heh. And to think a few people claimed I had writing skills... despite the 
> fact that I can't spell, can't write a report, and have lousy sentence 
> construction. :-S

You *** do *** have writing skills, otherwise people would just skip your 
posts and never answer them (even if it's just for snarking). You know how 
to tell stories and make them interesting, even ones based on really dull 
material. The self-pitying angle comes off pretty well and is somehow 
endearing (when it could be horribly annoying), in some Woody Allenesque 
way. Also your spelling isn't bad, except for some occasional glaring 
lapses. What you may lack is better material to work with and some literary 
background to give you inspiration and pointers, but otherwise what your 
write is enjoyable.

G.

Post a reply to this message

Gilles Tran escribió:
> You *** do *** have writing skills, otherwise people would just skip your 
> posts and never answer them (even if it's just for snarking). [...]
 > but otherwise what your write is enjoyable.

That's why he's our mascot, isn't it? :)

Post a reply to this message

Gilles Tran wrote:
> What you may lack is better material to work with and some literary 
> background to give you inspiration and pointers, but otherwise what your 
> write is enjoyable.

Yah, plus your technical writing isn't bad either, from the few snippets 
you've posted here when you write about things you enjoy.

You might need some instruction on how to (say) write a report for 
management, or something like that, but that's a skill that's relatively 
easy to learn with a bit of practice. It *does* take instruction, so you 
can't just keep trying an expect to get better without feedback. (Not 
unlike resumes, really.)

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message

Gilles Tran wrote:

> 47f7dabb$1@news.povray.org...
>>>> OK, now you're just describing *me*. :-(
>>> I thought about including a disclaimer that 'any resemblance to a p.o-t 
>>> regular or mascot is purely a coincidence' but decided against it.
>> Heh. And to think a few people claimed I had writing skills... despite the 
>> fact that I can't spell, can't write a report, and have lousy sentence 
>> construction. :-S
> 
> You *** do *** have writing skills, otherwise people would just skip your 
> posts and never answer them (even if it's just for snarking). You know how 
> to tell stories and make them interesting, even ones based on really dull 
> material. The self-pitying angle comes off pretty well and is somehow 
> endearing (when it could be horribly annoying), in some Woody Allenesque 
> way. Also your spelling isn't bad, except for some occasional glaring 
> lapses. What you may lack is better material to work with and some literary 
> background to give you inspiration and pointers, but otherwise what your 
> write is enjoyable.
> 
Sure, but this and his blog are something different than a report of a 
couple of weeks stay at a research lab. Spelling mistakes and bad 
sentences are common in newsgroups because people take too little time 
and write too late at night (my god it is nearly 12 already). In blogs 
it may depend on the writer, but normally you expect less trivial errors 
but allow for structural abnormalities as it is a free form text format. 
But if you are unable to construct a logical line of argument in a paper 
you can not be a good programmer as the skills required are the same. 
That was one of the things the author of 223 meant in his paper, I 
think. And if he didn't, let me say it. In summary: yes, I also think 
Andy may be a reasonable programmer. ;)

Post a reply to this message

47F### [at] hotmailcom...
> Sure, but this and his blog are something different than a report of a 
> couple of weeks stay at a research lab.

I'm pretty sure that Andy is perfectly able to write a decent report. It's 
just that the stuff he has to write about bores him to death so he won't 
even try to http://www.google.com/search?q=%22how+to+write+a+report%22 that.

G.

-- 
**********************
http://www.oyonale.com
**********************
- Graphic experiments
- POV-Ray, Cinema 4D and Poser computer art
- Posters

Post a reply to this message

Gilles Tran wrote:

> 47F### [at] hotmailcom...
>> Sure, but this and his blog are something different than a report of a 
>> couple of weeks stay at a research lab.
> 
> I'm pretty sure that Andy is perfectly able to write a decent report. 

He said he isn't. So who am I going to believe. In the same vain, I'm 
pretty sure that Andy is perfectly able to find a decent girlfriend. 
Yet, here the current facts seem to point another way.

> It's just that the stuff he has to write about bores him to death so he
> won't even try to http://www.google.com/search?q=%22how+to+write+a+report%22
 > that.

I *have* seem him use google a few times recently. Perhaps he did learn 
a few things since leaving university. He may not have been able to 
write a report then, but past performance is no guarantee of future 
results.

Post a reply to this message

>> I'm pretty sure that Andy is perfectly able to write a decent report. 
> 
> He said he isn't. So who am I going to believe.

I'm good at writing short, unstructured things. When trying to explain 
big concepts, I have trouble figuring out where to start and what order 
to say things in. My writing tends to lack high-level order - much like 
my thought processes.

["So you see, the derivative of a Nth order polynomial is a polynomial 
of order N-1. And that means - ooo, I wonder if dolphins can hear in 
stereo?"]

> In the same vain, I'm 
> pretty sure that Andy is perfectly able to find a decent girlfriend. 
> Yet, here the current facts seem to point another way.

As a matter of fact, I'm going to meet a friend in a pub this very 
afternoon. And I'm *hoping* he's convinced a certain lady he knows to 
tag along... ;-)

Now, if only I knew the magical incantation. [You know, the one that 
makes her go from "ok, I'm sitting here with a bunch of people chatting" 
to "hey, that boy is cute. I should make out with him..."]

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez wrote:

> That's why he's our mascot, isn't it? :)

You know, a few minutes after I posted "Phrases", I did wonder if maybe 
I might have accidentally created another bukkakke moment. :-S

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:

> Yah, plus your technical writing isn't bad either, from the few snippets 
> you've posted here when you write about things you enjoy.

Ooo... really?

> You might need some instruction on how to (say) write a report for 
> management, or something like that, but that's a skill that's relatively 
> easy to learn with a bit of practice. It *does* take instruction, so you 
> can't just keep trying an expect to get better without feedback. (Not 
> unlike resumes, really.)

Interestingly, my experience with the disaster recovery procedure 
document suggests otherwise...

[It used to be 3 pages of whaffle about "hey, um, if X fails we could 
maybe do Y, unless Z and then... uh... that's quite unlikely?" The sort 
of thing a student might dash off half an our before the hand-in date. 
Full of unecessary technical jargon, most of it used incorrectly.

That document is now 25 pages long, and consists of a high-level 
non-technical explanation of what systems we have in the first place, 
the fault tolerance measures it has, the emergency contracts he hold, 
etc etc before it even goes *into* disaster recovery steps. And then, 
for each disaster, it explains (in non-technical language) exactly what 
impact such a fault would have, and lists various recovery options. 
Apparently "external auditors love it". Make of that what you will...]

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>> I'm pretty sure that Andy is perfectly able to write a decent report. 
>>
>> He said he isn't. So who am I going to believe.
> 
> I'm good at writing short, unstructured things. When trying to explain 
> big concepts, I have trouble figuring out where to start and what order 
> to say things in. My writing tends to lack high-level order - much like 
> my thought processes.
> 
> ["So you see, the derivative of a Nth order polynomial is a polynomial 
> of order N-1. And that means - ooo, I wonder if dolphins can hear in 
> stereo?"]

Well, can they?

>> In the same vain, I'm pretty sure that Andy is perfectly able to find 
>> a decent girlfriend. Yet, here the current facts seem to point another 
>> way.
> 
> As a matter of fact, I'm going to meet a friend in a pub this very 
> afternoon. And I'm *hoping* he's convinced a certain lady he knows to 
> tag along... ;-)
> 
> Now, if only I knew the magical incantation. [You know, the one that 
> makes her go from "ok, I'm sitting here with a bunch of people chatting" 
> to "hey, that boy is cute. I should make out with him..."]

What does 'make out' mean in this context?
BTW I am not sure if you have already past your 'cute' date (because of 
being of the wrong sex to judge). You might try to go for 'interesting'. 
I think that is much safer. You can do that for many years to come, even 
outside of the context of chatting up ladies in bars. And you do have 
some unique features.

Post a reply to this message