2+2 and Editing: Oh, the Irony

[Mason Malmuth]

I think you and the OP should reread what I have written. What you will discover is that right at this moment we have major delays on two of our book projects solely due to writing (as opposed to content ) issues, and these delays have caused Two Plus Two as well as the authors to lose significant revenue. I don't know how it can be any more clear than that.

MM

[Gonso]

Mason,

Errors are actually okay, as long as you're multi-tabling.

G

[kickabuck]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

***WARNING: I'M MULTITABLING RIGHT NOW***


[/ QUOTE ]

There is no excuse for someone criticizing grammar and usage to commit errors in grammar and usage.


[ QUOTE ]
"Caesar's wife must be above suspicion."

[/ QUOTE ]

If you can't put enough time and effort into your posts to avoid doing what you are complaining about, you have zero credibility.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? I'm not selling these posts. I don't claim that every post I write is the absolute best in the "industry." My point is that 2+2's books are poorly edited, that this detracts greatly from the reading experience, and that decent editing is no impossible task. The fact that I don't spend a lot of time editing my 2+2 posts doesn't change that.

--Nate

[/ QUOTE ]

You felt it necessary to be highly critical of a man's work on his website, and proceed to give your credentials and reasons to legitimize your opinion. Then you proceed to make basic errors of your own presenting your argument and dismiss these as unimportant and also "you were doing something else simultaneously." If you are sincere in your belief and want to be taken seriously in the hope that Mason will in fact change his behavior, then it is incumbent upon you to put forth your argument as cogently as possible sans excuses. That means no grammatical errors, and not just winging it while multitabling. To do otherwise greatly inhibits the effectiveness of your argument. After all, who wouldn't agree that the readability of a book is important?

p.s. I see you are launching a book review blog, this also makes it incumbent upon you when posting(particularly when the post is about books), to give the posts your full attention and have them be error free.

[captain2man]

I always thought I'd be a decent proofreader...I just wanted to give it a shot....I don't think it took more than a couple of very slight changes to make the example paragraph more coherent:


Live play at a full table will generate approximately 30 to 40 hands per hour when things are running smoothly and oftentimes as little as 25 hands per hour when they do not. Internet play will generally yield 55 to 60 hands per hour at a full ring game and even more at short-handed tables. Because the poker rooms make more money from short-handed tables, and because many players enjoy the additional speed and nuances of a shorthanded game, they are becoming the rule rather than the exception.

[jfk]

[ QUOTE ]
it is incumbent upon you to put forth your argument as cogently as possible sans excuses. That means no grammatical errors, and not just winging it while multitabling. To do otherwise greatly inhibits the effectiveness of your argument. After all, who wouldn't agree that the readability of a book is important?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nate has established quite a track record for outstanding strategy contributions, both in the forums and in the monthly 2+2 magazine.

He voluntarily spends a great deal of his time writing thoughtful, insightful posts that result in the sort of dynamic learning that has improved the results of many readers.

The sort of high quality instruction, feedback and interaction from posters like Nate is now every bit as important to a player looking to improve his or her game as are 2+2 publications.

That being said, it is completely unreasonable to hold him to the same standard while making posts as one would hold the author of a book. Sometimes these posts are fit into the nooks and crannies of a very busy day. Typos and grammatical gaffes happen.

The sort of high quality advice Nate is known to provide often carries a stiff price tag in the outside world. It is a surprise that his contributions, done in a helpful spirit, aren't met with a bit more gratitude and graciousness.

[JackCase]

[ QUOTE ]

Typos and grammatical gaffes happen.



[/ QUOTE ]

Let him who is without syntax error cast the first stone.

[ QUOTE ]
The sort of high quality advice Nate is known to provide often carries a stiff price tag in the outside world. It is a surprise that his contributions, done in a helpful spirit, aren't met with a bit more gratitude and graciousness.

[/ QUOTE ]

Irrelevant. If you are going to make grammatical errors while ranting about grammatical errors, you have to know that you are going to get crap about it. Oh, the irony. [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

And no matter what the OP's other contributions to the forums, this issue has been beaten to death here many times before, and the OP contributed nothing new or interesting to the discussion.

[kickabuck]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
it is incumbent upon you to put forth your argument as cogently as possible sans excuses. That means no grammatical errors, and not just winging it while multitabling. To do otherwise greatly inhibits the effectiveness of your argument. After all, who wouldn't agree that the readability of a book is important?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nate has established quite a track record for outstanding strategy contributions, both in the forums and in the monthly 2+2 magazine.

He voluntarily spends a great deal of his time writing thoughtful, insightful posts that result in the sort of dynamic learning that has improved the results of many readers.

The sort of high quality instruction, feedback and interaction from posters like Nate is now every bit as important to a player looking to improve his or her game as are 2+2 publications.

That being said, it is completely unreasonable to hold him to the same standard while making posts as one would hold the author of a book. Sometimes these posts are fit into the nooks and crannies of a very busy day. Typos and grammatical gaffes happen.

The sort of high quality advice Nate is known to provide often carries a stiff price tag in the outside world. It is a surprise that his contributions, done in a helpful spirit, aren't met with a bit more gratitude and graciousness.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure I agree that a public posting disparaging 2+2 books and poking fun(asking for a list of the funniest mistakes in the books) in a forum populated by people who are making decisions whether or not to buy those same books is done in a 'helpful spirit'. If he is so highly credentialed, then a PM to Mason would be effective. If it is ignored, then it is Mason's loss presumably. Nate is apparently well aware of 2+2's shortcomings, he is an editor, how the heck is soliciting opinions from people who are ignorant of the field accomplishing anything? If nothing else, Mason's reaction is understandable, no one likes their work pilloried in so public a way on their own website. Again, the 'helpful spirit' would just as easily be met with a simple PM.

[Nate.]

[ QUOTE ]
I think you and the OP should reread what I have written. What you will discover is that right at this moment we have major delays on two of our book projects solely due to writing (as opposed to content ) issues, and these delays have caused Two Plus Two as well as the authors to lose significant revenue. I don't know how it can be any more clear than that.

MM

[/ QUOTE ]

Mason --

I understand you. You care a lot about the quality of your books but not enough, judging by WTHG, about grammar and style. It's not that you don't care about quality; it's that (I think) you have misguided notions of what makes a book good.

Again, it's a lot like the poker world. The issue really isn't my opinion; the issue is that if you paid more attention to style, you would either (A) make more money or (B) not make more money. (Just the way a poker decision can be argued and argued but, finally, will simply make or cost a player money.)

--Nate

[Nate.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
it is incumbent upon you to put forth your argument as cogently as possible sans excuses. That means no grammatical errors, and not just winging it while multitabling. To do otherwise greatly inhibits the effectiveness of your argument. After all, who wouldn't agree that the readability of a book is important?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nate has established quite a track record for outstanding strategy contributions, both in the forums and in the monthly 2+2 magazine.

He voluntarily spends a great deal of his time writing thoughtful, insightful posts that result in the sort of dynamic learning that has improved the results of many readers.

The sort of high quality instruction, feedback and interaction from posters like Nate is now every bit as important to a player looking to improve his or her game as are 2+2 publications.

That being said, it is completely unreasonable to hold him to the same standard while making posts as one would hold the author of a book. Sometimes these posts are fit into the nooks and crannies of a very busy day. Typos and grammatical gaffes happen.

The sort of high quality advice Nate is known to provide often carries a stiff price tag in the outside world. It is a surprise that his contributions, done in a helpful spirit, aren't met with a bit more gratitude and graciousness.

[/ QUOTE ]

jfk --

Thanks very much.

--Nate

[Nate.]

[ QUOTE ]
Mason,

Errors are actually okay, as long as you're multi-tabling.

G

[/ QUOTE ]

Gonso--

You're kidding, right? It's far closer to "errors are natural when you're giving away your work for free."

By the way, several people have PM'ed me saying that my posts have caused them to register on 2+2 and start posting. That means that I've spent many many hours making Mason Malmuth money.

--Nate