Re: Drawing Conclusions -- Feb 15
- From: "peterson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <racsspam@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 15 Feb 2006 15:11:35 -0800
Jim Ellwanger wrote:
In article <dsu0hm$7jn$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Sherwood Harrington
<sherwoodNO@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The nit: Like the fabled village somewhere in Texas that's missing its
idiot, the second sentence in the fourth paragraph is missing its verb.
You might want to fix that on the website for the teachers who download
it.
Another nit, as seen in the bottom box of "Drawing Conclusions":
"Whose Line Is It Anyway?", not "Who's."
It's been that kind of week. This afternoon, I sent a 28-page tabloid
to negative, only to have the backshop call me. The guy who was burning
the plates noted that I had put (on every page, of course) a
publication date of "Tuesday, February 22" and suggested I make up my
mind one way or the other.
I told him if it weren't already Wednesday, I'd start the damn week
over. Doesn't seem like there's much point now.
Mike Peterson
Glens Falls, NY ... I think ....
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Drawing Conclusions -- Feb 15
- From: Sherwood Harrington
- Re: Drawing Conclusions -- Feb 15
- References:
- Drawing Conclusions -- Feb 15
- From: peterson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Drawing Conclusions -- Feb 15
- From: Sherwood Harrington
- Re: Drawing Conclusions -- Feb 15
- From: Jim Ellwanger
- Drawing Conclusions -- Feb 15
- Prev by Date: Re: A plethora of Pibs?
- Next by Date: Re: A plethora of Pibs?
- Previous by thread: Re: Drawing Conclusions -- Feb 15
- Next by thread: Re: Drawing Conclusions -- Feb 15
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|