2 ms·
Prolific, be definition, speaks to volume and not quality? How does proof-reading contradict? I would say that his lack of quality (dropped T on The ;] Yes I s
by bap 9y ago
Prolific, be definition, speaks to volume and not quality? How does proof-reading contradict?
I would say that his lack of quality (dropped T on The ;] Yes I saw them too ) is perhaps supportive of his ability to be prolific "[...]make your first draft, your final draft."
I understand that you are saying that quality of edit indicates quality of thought or insight to you.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- yesenadam 9y agoI thought they was saying there's a jarring disconnect between bragging about your writing ability in a sloppily-edited essay. I don't think it's hard to understand their point, is it? I think you were being gratuitously pedantic. "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize." Well, there is Muphry's law.[0] Which I notice you - but hopefully not I :-) - have here fallen afoul of. Although you wrote in defence of bad proofreading; maybe there's another law for that. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry%27s_law