NEW CORRECTIONS PAGE

130px-Wite-Out_123.PNG180px-Pencil_EraserOn a trial basis, I have added a new corrections page at the top of the blog to allow readers to spot and raise any factual or grammatical problems with stories. I often add blog stories early in the morning or during brief windows of free time during the day. In the rush to get out a new story, I will sometimes miss typos that can be understandably annoying to readers. I am a terrible typist. This page is an effort to enlist our regulars in spotting any such problems to improve the site.

I have also added some independent proof-reading, but we want to ensure that the site is both factually accurate and grammatically correct.

It is only reserved for typos or any factual errors — not disagreements with the content or merits or spin of a story. This is the first of a number of improvements that I hope to make to the site this summer. Unfortunately, litigation has kept me from acting on all of your wonderful proposals, but I will do so as soon as I can get some meaningful time free from court.

Thanks again to all of our regulars and your role in making this such an interesting site. While we have our disagreements, this remains a site with a remarkably high level of discourse — and humor.

19 thoughts on “NEW CORRECTIONS PAGE”

  1. JT,

    I think you should call the page the Pedant’s Corner like they do at the Bead Museum library! To avoid crossing the line from homage to appropriation you could call it the Pedant’s Quarters (jaunty nautical theme)!

    “Pedants’ corner

    Description: The place for… members who keep a piece of chalk in their handbags for correcting badly punctuated restaurant chalkboard menus. For members who would rather leave off their underwear than leave out an apostrophe. If you swear in court on a copy of Eats, Shoots and Leaves, this is the place for you.”

    (AZ Bead Museum)

  2. enibob,

    Are you really Sara Palin? WOW!!! (I know you claim that was by Mark Twain, but I know it was writ by you, Sara. So modest.) 🙂

  3. “For example, in Year 1 that useless letter “c” would be dropped to be replased either by “k” or “s”, and likewise “x” would no longer be part of the alphabet. The only kase in which “c” would be retained would be the “ch” formation, which will be dealt with later. Year 2 might reform “w” spelling, so that “which” and “one” would take the same konsonant, wile Year 3 might well abolish “y” replasing it with “i” and Iear 4 might fiks the “g
    j” anomali wonse and for all.

    Jenerally, then, the improvement would kontinue iear bai iear with Iear 5 doing awai with useless double konsonants, and Iears 6-12 or so modifaiing vowlz and the rimeining voist and unvoist konsonants. Bai Iear 15 or sou, it wud fainali bi posibl tu meik ius ov thi ridandant letez “c”, “y” and “x” — bai now jast a memori in the maindz ov ould doderez — tu riplais “ch”, “sh”, and “th” rispektivli.

    Fainali, xen, aafte sam 20 iers ov orxogrefkl riform, wi wud
    hev a lojikl, kohirnt speling in ius xrewawt xe Ingliy-spiking werld.
    Mark Twain (1835 – 1910), “A Plan for the Improvement of English Spelling”

  4. Being a terrible typist is a bloody poor excuse considering legislators, judges and lawyers give us a hard time being able to merely reading the law – let alone understanding it – no matter how they misspell it.

    Two golden rules: 1. the thicker the rulebook, the worse the organisation. 2. Justice is “just this”. This means all legislation should be so easy a 6-year old can spell and understand it.

    “All are equal, some are more equal than others”, what more do you funkin’ need….

  5. Prof. Turley,
    I am sure that the minor typos that will shoe up every once in awhile, are due to some neocon trolls tinkering with your software!

  6. Please Prof….no need to apologize for poor typing skills. I remember when typing was mandatory for girls so that we could grow up and become secretaries instead of law professors.
    I refused to learn to type then, on principle, and refuse to apologize for being a bad typist now.
    anyway if love means never having to say you are sorry it should also mean never having to correct typos unless this is your thesis or something.

  7. Prof. Turley, your typos are gems and add to your witticisms. I would have sworn that you intentionally typed some ‘on porpoise’.

    As I have often said, I do not know how you find the time to write this blawg, but we all appreciate that you take whatever time you have to present it.

  8. JT,
    Good attempt to deal with the minor annoying problems we sometimes encounter here. Now if you only had a feature for me to remember to proofread my own stuff, I might never have to go to corrections. For me it’s not so much spell check it’s a fast hunt and peck typing style that often leaves off finishing thoughts.

  9. I see now that corrections go on the new page. My comments are already on record at the birth site.

    Corrections
    This page is reserved ONLY for suggested factual or grammatical errors — not for disagreements over the conclusions or interpretations found in blog entries. If readers disagree with the merits of a story, they should use the comment section of that story to raise such issues.

  10. I am concerned about our latest Birther thread on two points. http://jonathanturley.org/2009/07/19/retired-major-general-joins-litigation-over-obamas-birth-status/#comment-70031

    First, the headline says that a retired major general joined the suit, but his participation is in dispute according to the news article that Sandra linked. He says he never consented. So he should not be accused of joining the suit.

    Sandra 1, July 20, 2009 at 7:54 am
    Childers denies being part of this suit. He claimed he signed up as a plaintiff on another motion and she “signed” him up on the Cook case without his permission.
    http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/news/story/779856.html

    The second point is that the lead article does not make it clear that Cook volunteered for his deployment. That changes everything. It is one thing to sue to stop a deployment if the President had ordered him to Afghanistan against his will, but his voluntary request changes the facts completely.

    Vince Treacy 1, July 22, 2009 at 8:30 am
    Cook volunteered for deployment. He could have changed his mind at any time. Then he filed a lawsuit to stop deployment. That was pretty good evidence that he had changed his mind. How could the Army possibly defend on the merits? If they agree to his request for an injunction to stop the deployment, then they have to cancel his orders. There was no possible way for this case to present a case or controversy to the court. There was simply no basis for jurisdiction.

  11. The Turley Correctional Institute for chronic bad spellers and reform of serial typosists is now open for business!

    whooliebacon,

    En Garde indeed!

  12. Thank you for offering these services to us. The only thing I could think of is if we could correct our own errors in posting or retract a post Once I realize how inane it really is.

Comments are closed.