Comments on: Americans Read http://www.thereforeyou.com/content/americans-read The Official Blog Of Therefore Productions Sun, 26 Dec 2010 17:58:33 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: rlr260 http://www.thereforeyou.com/content/americans-read/comment-page-1#comment-90 rlr260 Fri, 11 Apr 2008 01:42:36 +0000 http://www.thereforeyou.com/content/americans-read#comment-90 Saying the Bible is one's favorite read is like the time GWBush said Jesus was his favorite philosopher. You just know they're bullshitting you. And Grammar Counts needs to get a life. Saying the Bible is one’s favorite read is like the time GWBush said Jesus was his favorite philosopher. You just know they’re bullshitting you.

And Grammar Counts needs to get a life.

]]> By: Zukasky http://www.thereforeyou.com/content/americans-read/comment-page-1#comment-89 Zukasky Thu, 10 Apr 2008 22:46:58 +0000 http://www.thereforeyou.com/content/americans-read#comment-89 When I saw this poll my first thought was, "how many respondents who answered with the bible have actually ever read it? I'm guessing less than a quarter." My second thought was, "I didn't think that many americans even knew Gone With the Wind was a book." My final thought was, "who else wants to smack Grammar Counts?" When I saw this poll my first thought was, “how many respondents who answered with the bible have actually ever read it? I’m guessing less than a quarter.”

My second thought was, “I didn’t think that many americans even knew Gone With the Wind was a book.”

My final thought was, “who else wants to smack Grammar Counts?”

]]> By: Patrick http://www.thereforeyou.com/content/americans-read/comment-page-1#comment-88 Patrick Thu, 10 Apr 2008 22:38:40 +0000 http://www.thereforeyou.com/content/americans-read#comment-88 Wow, Grammar Counts, you're a terrible proofreader! You overlooked: Opening: Missing comma in the last sentence preceding the list. 2. double-negative in #2, followed by comma-in-place-of-semicolon, followed by missing capitalization of the interjection "Ooh!" 3. Missing quotes, apostrophes where there should be quotes. Missing hyphen in "top selling." 4. "past time" should be "pastime" 5. The second 5 may have been a joke, a structural version of a double-take, referencing the fact that Dan Brown got on the list twice. Who's to say? Nonetheless, I fixed it. Last Paragraph: There was a second "alot" here, a sentence starting with "which," and, finally, an unnecessary comma preceding "because." If you're going to go to people's blogs and point out their grammatical errors in an ordered list, at least take the time to catch them all. That's what I would do if I subscribed to your view of "Always take the time to be rigidly grammatically correct before publishing any statement." In any case, I've made the necessary corrections. As we do not derive revenue from this site, we cannot afford to "hire" a proofreader (something you recommend as though it were a trivial and obvious solution). Proofreading must wait until we have time to do it ourselves. While I believe that grammar counts, I disagree strongly with your statement that people publishing online have a duty to make all of their postings grammatically perfect before publishing. First, one of the primary reasons for posting online is to make commentary on current events. If bloggers have to wait for a proofreader before they post anything, they've lost the rapid exchange of information that makes the internet unique and valuable. Second, posts on the internet can be corrected after they've been published, so I think that, as per my first point, the priority must be on getting the content out the door quickly, and then on correcting for grammar. Third and finally, this is a blog in the backwater of the internet; it can and should have a relaxed and informal tone. You mentioned that grammar is important, but you failed to state WHY, so I'll take the liberty: grammar is important, first and foremost, so that language can be understood. Much of English grammar is not entirely necessary in this regard (as a language, it's been through a lot to get where it is today). None of the mistakes you pointed out seemed to interfere with your understanding of Rollerson's post (Girl's got two degrees; she gets her points across with or without apostrophes). So, please, have some empathy for our situation and judge us not by the grammatical rigor of our sentences, but by the content of our posts. Thanks! Wow, Grammar Counts, you’re a terrible proofreader! You overlooked:
Opening: Missing comma in the last sentence preceding the list.
2. double-negative in #2, followed by comma-in-place-of-semicolon, followed by missing capitalization of the interjection “Ooh!”
3. Missing quotes, apostrophes where there should be quotes. Missing hyphen in “top selling.”
4. “past time” should be “pastime”
5. The second 5 may have been a joke, a structural version of a double-take, referencing the fact that Dan Brown got on the list twice. Who’s to say? Nonetheless, I fixed it.
Last Paragraph: There was a second “alot” here, a sentence starting with “which,” and, finally, an unnecessary comma preceding “because.”
If you’re going to go to people’s blogs and point out their grammatical errors in an ordered list, at least take the time to catch them all. That’s what I would do if I subscribed to your view of “Always take the time to be rigidly grammatically correct before publishing any statement.” In any case, I’ve made the necessary corrections. As we do not derive revenue from this site, we cannot afford to “hire” a proofreader (something you recommend as though it were a trivial and obvious solution). Proofreading must wait until we have time to do it ourselves. While I believe that grammar counts, I disagree strongly with your statement that people publishing online have a duty to make all of their postings grammatically perfect before publishing. First, one of the primary reasons for posting online is to make commentary on current events. If bloggers have to wait for a proofreader before they post anything, they’ve lost the rapid exchange of information that makes the internet unique and valuable. Second, posts on the internet can be corrected after they’ve been published, so I think that, as per my first point, the priority must be on getting the content out the door quickly, and then on correcting for grammar. Third and finally, this is a blog in the backwater of the internet; it can and should have a relaxed and informal tone. You mentioned that grammar is important, but you failed to state WHY, so I’ll take the liberty: grammar is important, first and foremost, so that language can be understood. Much of English grammar is not entirely necessary in this regard (as a language, it’s been through a lot to get where it is today). None of the mistakes you pointed out seemed to interfere with your understanding of Rollerson’s post (Girl’s got two degrees; she gets her points across with or without apostrophes). So, please, have some empathy for our situation and judge us not by the grammatical rigor of our sentences, but by the content of our posts. Thanks!

]]> By: Grammar Counts http://www.thereforeyou.com/content/americans-read/comment-page-1#comment-87 Grammar Counts Thu, 10 Apr 2008 21:27:30 +0000 http://www.thereforeyou.com/content/americans-read#comment-87 1. Insert period 2. Its should be "it's" 3. Its should be "it's" 4. Alot should be "a lot" Who should be "whom" your should be "you're" 5. Its should be "it is" 5. the second 5 should be 6 Last paragraph: American's should be "Americans" If people are going to publish their writing, even online, they should know basic grammar or at least hire a proofreader. 1. Insert period
2. Its should be “it’s”
3. Its should be “it’s”
4. Alot should be “a lot”
Who should be “whom”
your should be “you’re”
5. Its should be “it is”
5. the second 5 should be 6
Last paragraph: American’s should be “Americans”

If people are going to publish their writing, even online, they should know basic grammar or at least hire a proofreader.

]]> By: Patrick http://www.thereforeyou.com/content/americans-read/comment-page-1#comment-86 Patrick Thu, 10 Apr 2008 20:43:43 +0000 http://www.thereforeyou.com/content/americans-read#comment-86 Also, the sample probably skews toward nerds because everyone who took the poll had to be a) On the internet and b) Nerdy enough to sign up with a polling website. Also, the sample probably skews toward nerds because everyone who took the poll had to be a) On the internet and b) Nerdy enough to sign up with a polling website.

]]> By: Androsko http://www.thereforeyou.com/content/americans-read/comment-page-1#comment-85 Androsko Thu, 10 Apr 2008 20:28:26 +0000 http://www.thereforeyou.com/content/americans-read#comment-85 I have two thoughts, and that's it. I refuse anymore thought until further notice. First, I definately think that people are answering "the Bible" out of some sense of obligation. I also think that most of them are bullshitting. My brother was arguing with one of our cousins about reading the Bible, and it was news to her that there are three creation stories in Genesis. Here she was talking about how everyone should read and interperet the Bible literally, and she didn't even know what was in it. Second, I would bet that a lot of people who still read regularly are also nerds. That would account for the large number of LoTR responses. That, and the movies were cute. People like cute things. I have two thoughts, and that’s it. I refuse anymore thought until further notice.

First, I definately think that people are answering “the Bible” out of some sense of obligation. I also think that most of them are bullshitting. My brother was arguing with one of our cousins about reading the Bible, and it was news to her that there are three creation stories in Genesis. Here she was talking about how everyone should read and interperet the Bible literally, and she didn’t even know what was in it.

Second, I would bet that a lot of people who still read regularly are also nerds. That would account for the large number of LoTR responses. That, and the movies were cute. People like cute things.

]]> By: Patrick http://www.thereforeyou.com/content/americans-read/comment-page-1#comment-84 Patrick Wed, 09 Apr 2008 23:57:47 +0000 http://www.thereforeyou.com/content/americans-read#comment-84 The whole conclusion is kind of useless, as well. What does it mean for a book to be most cited as "favorite" among Americans? The only meaningful conclusion we can REALLY draw from this study (assuming no major bias in the sample) is what title most Americans will SAY when asked the question "What is your favorite book?" Having this information tells us nothing else. We can make no conclusions about what Americans are actually reading, how often they are reading it, or anything else that relates significantly to what Americans are doing or thinking. The whole conclusion is kind of useless, as well. What does it mean for a book to be most cited as “favorite” among Americans? The only meaningful conclusion we can REALLY draw from this study (assuming no major bias in the sample) is what title most Americans will SAY when asked the question “What is your favorite book?” Having this information tells us nothing else. We can make no conclusions about what Americans are actually reading, how often they are reading it, or anything else that relates significantly to what Americans are doing or thinking.

]]> By: Patrick http://www.thereforeyou.com/content/americans-read/comment-page-1#comment-83 Patrick Wed, 09 Apr 2008 23:49:28 +0000 http://www.thereforeyou.com/content/americans-read#comment-83 The sample size itself is actually pretty good. That's double what Gallup uses to measure the national opinion on presidential candidates. Also: the relation of sample size to margin of error is asymptotic - with the American population specifically, you get diminishing returns in accuracy when you go past a 1,000 person sample size. Still, I think the sample itself is probably biased. You can see the methodology here: http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=892 Notice that Harris admits and tries to gloss over two points - that the sample is drawn from Harris Online members and that Harris doesn't attempt to measure their margin of error. Also, certain demographics in the sample were weighted to bring them in line with their actual representation in the overall population. That seems like a problem: how do you "weight" an unprompted response to "what is your favorite book?" aside from simply eliminating the answers of people who were overrepresented and double-counting the answers of people who were underrepresented. Since they're not using stratified sampling, the margin of error resulting from manipulating responses within smaller demographic groups is probably significant. This is all speculation, though. I'd like to see more complete information on their methodology as well. The sample size itself is actually pretty good. That’s double what Gallup uses to measure the national opinion on presidential candidates. Also: the relation of sample size to margin of error is asymptotic – with the American population specifically, you get diminishing returns in accuracy when you go past a 1,000 person sample size. Still, I think the sample itself is probably biased. You can see the methodology here: http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=892
Notice that Harris admits and tries to gloss over two points – that the sample is drawn from Harris Online members and that Harris doesn’t attempt to measure their margin of error. Also, certain demographics in the sample were weighted to bring them in line with their actual representation in the overall population. That seems like a problem: how do you “weight” an unprompted response to “what is your favorite book?” aside from simply eliminating the answers of people who were overrepresented and double-counting the answers of people who were underrepresented. Since they’re not using stratified sampling, the margin of error resulting from manipulating responses within smaller demographic groups is probably significant. This is all speculation, though. I’d like to see more complete information on their methodology as well.

]]>