WS Magazine Dec 2009

[adrian]

Grave Maurice (whoever you are),

If you stop criticising us we might be able to get on with producing our Journal.

I suggest you hitch up your pedantry skirt and tiptoe away along the corridor of churlish embarrassment.

I notice that all the critics on this stream have not drawn attention to the success of our short story competition and the fact that we raised the significant sum of £1,700 for the charity, Children With Leukaemia.

That WAS £1,700 (that was not a proof reading error!)

Editor.

[The Grave Maurice]

OK, that was fun. Now maybe you guys should spend less time patting each other on the back and spend more time proofreading. We all await the next issue.

[coral]

My pleasure Adrian and I thoroughly endorse the words of Chris Jones.

Happy New Year to everyone.

Coral

[adrian]

Chris,

Thank you so very much for your kind words of support.

The bad feeling has been caused by posters suggesting we change contributor's articles when they submit them - this is completely untrue - and their general tone of dismissive ridicule towards the Whitechapel Society Journal.

Once again, thank you very much for your support, and to Coral for her comments.

Adrian.

[Chris Jones]

Please give the guys at the WS a break.

Coral[/QUOTE]


The only thing that surprises me about the WS journal is that its quality is so consistently good. I do not know how Adrian and the rest of his team manage to maintain such a high standard.

I have written the odd article for various publications and have even managed to produce an occasional rugby newsletter - I found that hard enough! However, to produce a high quality and extremely interesting and informative journal 6 times a year is a remarkable achievement.

If any of you who frequent these message boards have not yet seen a copy of the WS journal, can I politely suggest that you get hold of a copy and read it. You will enjoy it. The journal is free for members of the Whitechapel Society.

Happy New Year, Chris Jones

[adrian]

Scott,

I think the issue has become muddled here. We do not necessarily need a proof reader, certainly not the ones above claiming they could do it. The vexed responses have been caused by the intimation that we do.

An odd mistake got through - as they always do - because of reasons to do with deadlines etc, but essentially standards are very good.

I just felt some comments from some quarters were unjustified, mocking and unfair and, possibly, ill-advised.

Thankfully wisdom came from the keyboard of Coral who brought the debate down to earth. Reminding me that silly comments should be treated as just that!

Editor.

[coral]

Isn't this getting a little out of hand - the letter 'r' was missed of a word -someone thought it funny - Philip Hutchinson, I think - who is not Rob Clack's arch enemy - just two people winding each other up.

Please give the guys at the WS a break.

Coral

[Scott Nelson]

OK, I'll do it. But do I have to, 1) subscribe, 2) actually show up at the magazine's vast production facilities, and 3) have a perfect command of grammer, or would a slightly less than perfect grasp suffice??

Expecting your most exigent reply.

[adrian]

On the proof reading issue, those who have offered their services above need not apply, we need professionals!

Although, we might make the spacing between lines bigger so you have somewhere to put your finger when you read!!!

Editor.

[adrian]

Hi GM,

I have offered my services in the past, but what can you do?

No complaints from me though. It's not my writing or my mag under the spotlight. I just enjoy reading it (though not always for the right reasons).

Love,

Caz
X

Caz,

You are of course right that it is not your writing or mag under the spotlight. Please understand those who do write for it have a right to be respected. At least they have the guts to get up and write something!

Many do enjoy reading the magazine, thankfully for the right reasons and not for a cheap laugh!

Editor.

[adrian]

We don't have time to send articles to others to proof read and I don't think we would benefit from doing so.

We don't get any money out of this this, we work to tight deadlines and with - it seems obvious - little reward. Often criticism like the above is rather like "knowing the price of everything, and the value of nothing!"

If anyone can do better they might wish to apply for the job of editor at the WS1888 BGM in February....but then again, you won't!

And we do not change other people's articles as was intimated in some of the posts.

Editor.

[caz]

Hi GM,

I have offered my services in the past, but what can you do?

No complaints from me though. It's not my writing or my mag under the spotlight. I just enjoy reading it (though not always for the right reasons).

Love,

Caz
X

[The Grave Maurice]

Sometimes, when you're too close to a project, you can't see what, to others, are obvious errors. I don't have a lot of skills, but proof-reading is one of them. If the editors care to send a troublesome text along to me, I'd be glad to give it the benefit of my (limited) talents.

[adrian]

We proof read as best we can. Any errors left in are an error and not deliberate despite some comments.

Any complains can be addressed to the editor, hopefully, in person!

Editor.

[caz]

I know she didn't, Rob. But it needn't have been down to Jackie. She only submitted the article. Mysterious things can happen to one's words after that - as we know only too well.

Love,

Caz
X