OK, Ok, or Okay?

[RogueLurker]

... bastard

 

[snooper]

Cruel???? Well if we are using other people's pictures:

 

[sr71plt]

Ah, I see. I had thought this forum category, under "editor" Lady C, was for blind-leading-the-blind wanna be writers. It's quite evident, though, it's just for juvenile chat room yakkers. Sure, spell words anyway you want. You're not going anywhere with your "writing" anyway, it certainly would seem.

Still, if anyone reading here wants to rise above this, I recommend you buy and use/consult The Chicago Manual of Style and Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary. This was never about me saying I had all the answers--it was about saying there was standardization and pointing out where a serious writer could find the best practice answers him/herself.

 

[Guest]

Ah, I see. I had thought this forum category, under "editor" Lady C, was for blind-leading-the-blind wanna be writers. It's quite evident, though, it's just for juvenile chat room yakkers. Sure, spell words anyway you want. You're not going anywhere with your "writing" anyway, it certainly would seem.

Still, if anyone reading here wants to rise above this, I recommend you buy and use/consult The Chicago Manual of Style and Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary. This was never about me saying I had all the answers--it was about saying there was standardization and pointing out where a serious writer could be find the best practice answers him/herself.

Okay.

 

[CopyCarver]

Ah, I see. I had thought this forum category, under "editor" Lady C, was for blind-leading-the-blind wanna be writers. It's quite evident, though, it's just for juvenile chat room yakkers. Sure, spell words anyway you want. You're not going anywhere with your "writing" anyway, it certainly would seem.

Still, if anyone reading here wants to rise above this, I recommend you buy and use/consult The Chicago Manual of Style and Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary. This was never about me saying I had all the answers--it was about saying there was standardization and pointing out where a serious writer could be find the best practice answers him/herself.

Not that it's remotely any of your business, but there are at least four people in this forum who are professional editors, and others are published writers. It's highly unlikely that you are--or ever will be--anything more than a loud-mouthed perpetual wanna be who fails to realize that rigid adherence to rules you don't even understand is not the hallmark of a good writer, but rather of someone who's talent peaked in seventh grade English class.

Personally, I have earned a very good living as a freelance writer for more than 20 years, with a dozen books and more than 2,000 magazine articles published. I'm currently the editor of a major university press, and I'm selling about 80 freelance articles per year in my spare time.

You, conversely,seem to spend most of your free time runnng your mouth without having the faintest clue what you're pontificating about. (Yes, I ended a sentence with a preposition--sue me!) The Chicago Manual, for example, is an excellent style guide, but it is only one of many; it's the "bible" at some publishing houses but it is literally the kiss of death at others. The only "standardization" that exists at quality publishers consists of good writing and choice of subject matter that is likely to appeal to the targeted readers. I could easily cite a half-dozen additional examples of errors in your diatribes, but arguing with an idiot would merely waste my time and might overload your four functional neurons.

If you're even half as interested in rising as you claim to be, stick your head back up your ass and fart twice. The only mind you're capable of expanding is your own.

 

[sr71plt]

Rather presumptuous of you, CopyCarver, to claim any idea what my editorial credentials are. And thus your personal attack on that falls flat. If you PM me your real name and credentials, I'll be happy to direct you to my professional editorial Web sites that give my editorial/publishing credentials (*smile*). And I can certainly say that if you are slamming what I've recommended on using the Chicago Manual of Style and Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary as the safest guides to writing in the humanities, all of the background you claim is a lot of hot air. That's all I did here--point to the safest sources to use. (And yes, I do realize that a lot of academic presses--including the major one I just did a stint as managing editor for--use MLA style for English lit. But the mainline trade houses don't. They use the Chicago Manual of Style--and the cited dictionary--and, again, if you are denying this, you are a fake.) (But apparently good enough for this forum).

I also acknowledged in the posting above that every publisher has a slightly divergent house style--but that the safest thing to right to use is the generally accepted style until you know what house is publishing your work. (And if you don't see the common sense in that, you are lying about being a trained publishing industry editor.)


Deleted this part because of mudslinging on the part of this individual.

Cheers

 

[LadyCibelle]

Not that it's remotely any of your business, but there are at least four people in this forum who are professional editors, and others are published writers. It's highly unlikely that you are--or ever will be--anything more than a loud-mouthed perpetual wanna be who fails to realize that rigid adherence to rules you don't even understand is not the hallmark of a good writer, but rather of someone who's talent peaked in seventh grade English class.

Personally, I have earned a very good living as a freelance writer for more than 20 years, with a dozen books and more than 2,000 magazine articles published. I'm currently the editor of a major university press, and I'm selling about 80 freelance articles per year in my spare time.

You, conversely,seem to spend most of your free time runnng your mouth without having the faintest clue what you're pontificating about. (Yes, I ended a sentence with a preposition--sue me!) The Chicago Manual, for example, is an excellent style guide, but it is only one of many; it's the "bible" at some publishing houses but it is literally the kiss of death at others. The only "standardization" that exists at quality publishers consists of good writing and choice of subject matter that is likely to appeal to the targeted readers. I could easily cite a half-dozen additional examples of errors in your diatribes, but arguing with an idiot would merely waste my time and might overload your four functional neurons.

If you're even half as interested in rising as you claim to be, stick your head back up your ass and fart twice. The only mind you're capable of expanding is your own.

Okay (or is it OK, Ok, oK O.K., O.k. ) that's it. With THIS you've just won yourself a permanent membership into the LadyCibelle's Hall of Fame, a gold plated key of my personal booze cabinet and some sexual favours to be discussed privately.

 

[sr71plt]

Deleted this part because of mudslinging on the part of this individual.

 

[LadyCibelle]

Deleted it all because of mudslinging.

 

[LadyCibelle]

"Okay (or is it OK, Ok, oK O.K., O.k. ) that's it. With THIS you've just won yourself a permanent membership into the LadyCibelle's Hall of Fame, a gold plated key of my personal booze cabinet and some sexual favours to be discussed privately."

Which shows your worth as moderator of this forum room as well. *grin* I'd certainly like for everyone drinking in your "editorial" advice to see what you really know about giving any such guidance. I know, I know, you're the poetry editor of the New York Review of Books. *wink*

Jealous much, are you? What? Nobody has offered you sexual favours for your insights? Poor little baby....go cry into your new best friend, Scouries' lap, I'm sure he'll appreciate all your wonderful words of wisdom.

 

[Guest]

He seems to have issues with chat rooms.

Too much time in the "Men who wear panties and the women who love them" Room, perhaps?

 

[LadyCibelle]

He seems to have issues with chat rooms.

Too much time in the "Men who wear panties and the women who love them" Room, perhaps?

Keep at it Sarahh and I'll also offer you sexual favours ....that'll teach him!

 

[RogueLurker]

Ah, I see. I had thought this forum category, under "editor" Lady C, was for blind-leading-the-blind wanna be writers. It's quite evident, though, it's just for juvenile chat room yakkers. Sure, spell words anyway you want. You're not going anywhere with your "writing" anyway, it certainly would seem.

Still, if anyone reading here wants to rise above this, I recommend you buy and use/consult The Chicago Manual of Style and Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary. This was never about me saying I had all the answers--it was about saying there was standardization and pointing out where a serious writer could find the best practice answers him/herself.

You pointed out the Chicago Manual of Style and Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary as valid reference books for this (and other) spelling and style questions in posts 5, 8, 12 and then I stopped paying attention. Those who want to take that advice will do so - those that aren't interested will ignore it.

 

[Guest]

Keep at it Sarahh and I'll also offer you sexual favours ....that'll teach him!

Oooh.

Keep talking, baby.

 

[RogueLurker]

Oooh.

Keep talking, baby.

Honestly! You people have no respect for the English language - standards are being lowered and you're here flirting.

 

[sr71plt]

Deleted this part because of mudslinging on the part of this individual.


Again, anyone reading this thread who has any serious interest in your writing development--do your own research and use common sense. You aren't going to get it from this forum, as moderated. Only going to shoot yourself in the foot.

 

[LadyCibelle]

Honestly! You people have no respect for the English language - standards are being lowered and you're here flirting.

We're really bad, are we, Rogue?

Maybe we should spend our day looking glum and make sure we never, ever, smile or laugh. I'm sure Webster's and that other guy would be so happy.

 

[RogueLurker]

Yep, love it. The only response chat room yakkers have is juvenile one-liners. *grin* Anyone salvageable as a serious writer will certainly understand the worth of this forum category. That's good enough.

Again, anyone reading this thread who has any serious interest in your writing development--do your own research and use common sense. You aren't going to get it from this forum, as moderated. Only going to shoot yourself in the foot.

Anyone that relies only on chatrooms and forums for research is not going to get very far.

 

[Guest]

Honestly! You people have no respect for the English language - standards are being lowered and you're here flirting.

I know. My graduate advisor said the same thing.

Isn't it pathetic? I'm so ashamed.

Wanna sit on my lap?

 

[LadyCibelle]

I know. My graduate advisor said the same thing.

Isn't it pathetic? I'm so ashamed.

Wanna sit on my lap?

Ladies....we SHOULD be ashamed! Seriously, it's not very nice of us to toy with someone who hasn't taken his meds for a long time; delusion of grandeur is a serious ailment and we should pity the poor bugger, not make fun of him.

Can I sit on your lap too, Sarahh? I'll bring rhum.

 

[RogueLurker]

I know. My graduate advisor said the same thing.

Isn't it pathetic? I'm so ashamed.

Wanna sit on my lap?

A tempting invitation ... but how do I know where you're diphthong's been?

 

[LadyCibelle]

A tempting invitation ... but how do I know where you're diphthong's been?

ROFLMAO....Pepsi spew!

 

[Guest]

A tempting invitation ... but how do I know where you're diphthong's been?

I pronounce them properly, especially when I sing. No fears.

If you wish to discuss my pussy, well, that's a different matter.

Meow.

 

[Guest]

Can I sit on your lap too, Sarahh? I'll bring rhum.

Yes.

 

[RogueLurker]

I pronounce them properly, especially when I sing. No fears.

If you wish to discuss my pussy, well, that's a different matter.

Meow.

Kitten Wars ... Part II