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.
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.
Comment