WSJ on Ethanol

[Fransisco]

Ihav a spellling chekker.
It came with my PC.
It plane lee marks four my revue
Miss steaks aye can knot see.
Eye ran this poem threw it.
Your sure real glad two no.
Its very polished in its weigh,
My checker tolled me sew.
A checker is a blessings.
It freeze yew lodes of thyme.
It helps me right awl stiles two reed,
And aides me when aye rime.
Each frays comes posed up on my screen
Eye trussed too bee a joule.
The chekcer pours o'er every word
To cheque sum spalling rule.
Bee fore a veiling chekers
Hour spelling mite decline,
And if we're laks oar have a laps,
We wood bee maid too wine.
Butt now bee cause my spelling
Is checked with such grate flare,
There are know faults with in my cite,
Of nun eye am a wear.
Now spelling does not phase me,
It does knot bring a tier.
My pay purrs awl due glad den
With wrapped words fare as hear.
Of witch won should be proud,
And wee mussed dew the best wee can,
Sew flaws are knot aloud.
Sow ewe can sea why aye dew prays
Such soft wear four pea seas,
And why eye brake in two averse
Buy righting want too please.

[Fransisco]

Sorry, but spelling and grammar matter.

As my last post demonstrated when ignorance rules the day comprehension goes out the window.

Yes, this is all meant to be informal and off-the-cuff and everybody makes mistakes. But egregiously misspelling a word every sentence not only makes it hard to read, it detracts from the validity of an idea or argument.

People may think, oh, calm down, it's not that big a deal, we get the idea anyway.

True.

We do get the idea behind a poorly spelled post. But it's the difference between watching a movie on a TV with bad reception and broken rabbit ears versus on digital cable through a flat-screen.

Furthermore, flippantly ignoring the basics shows a fundamental disrespect for the reader who has to unnecessarily strain just to untangle and comprehend whats being said.

Simply put, it's rude.

You may think looking marginally-literate is cute. It's not. It's like walking around in public with your fly down and your butt crack showing.

[just_wondering]

what kind of libertarian tells someone else what they think is rude.
Its like the definition of business casual pretty fluid and depends on the situation.

[jensend]

hey you forgot a question mark.

[Fransisco]

A liberitarian who wants people to be free to be the best they can be. Not the worst.

There is a difference.

[Fransisco]

This is probably a first on this forum. Someone getting heck for actually trying to raise the level of debate.

[Fransisco]

I find it interesting that I pointed out two things that bother me about Jen; the inability to <b>differentiate between 'slavery' and 'voluntary' employment</b> and the obvious laziness in the grammar department.

Both of which are true. The first one <b>offensively so</b>, the second one is more annoying than anything.

Yet pointing out that someone can't be bothered to pull up their pants seems to bother you more, just_wondering, than someone minimizing the horror of slavery.

Like I said, isn't that interesting.

[cottonpicken]

How about simple democracy then.

Your the only one that is so damn bothered by spelling.Give it up captain annoying.

It's almost as bad as tom's bible thumpin.

[jensend]

i can differentiate between slavery and voluntary employment. i said i didn't think the employers put significantly more value on sweatshop employees in developing countries than slaveowners put on slaves. are you sure not using upper case is a grammatical error? you seem very noble.

[Fransisco]

You kids have the right to be wrong.

But that doesn't mean I don't have the right to point it out.

I'll stop, when you start communicating like adults.

Until then you'll just have to suck it up, crybabies.

[just_wondering]

Fransisco

re: Yet pointing out that someone can't be bothered to pull up their pants seems to bother you more, just_wondering, than someone minimizing the horror of slavery


Your mixing up your posts.
I stayed out of the slavery thread because I know what I don't know.
Biofuels happens to be a interest of mine (I'll admit I have some dollars invested)
So I am working to keep the dollars invested in Canada
Brazilian Sugar might be more efficient but how does that keep jobs in rural Canada?
Is it more efficient because environmental laws are less stringent south of the equator?
What is the number that import tariffs should be to keep imports out, what if those imports were subsidized in the first place?

Should there be a sunset clause on plants getting taxpayer dollars, or a revenue cap ala equalization?
Name me an industry in Canada that receives no favorable govt policy I'll show you an industry in decline.
It seems that the US will no longer export corn after 2012. The result will do more to improve prices for the worlds poor than anything done in modern agriculture!

Fransisco you and I agree on so many things, I believe that you are wrong on this (biofuels) issue. Point your guns outside the wagons

[just_wondering]

to everyone
I am waiting for some responses on biofuels and subsidies I have my own ideas, but would like to raise the level of debate and stick with the original thread.
It is a complex issue with complex responses what are some of the issues?

Do I have backyarditis ( not a real word).