The Illiteracy of Corporate American E-Mail

Dave writes "There is a pretty amusing/sad article about functional illiteracy when it comes to professional e-mails. Some of the samples are just ridiculous."

Comments

How they become?

[fembots]

How did these employees get into the company door in the first place? Didn't they have to write some sort of CV that their employers can understand? Or are they gradually getting worse in the corporate/email environment?

P.S. This are one of the Slashdot articles that I am so worrifiedably scared to be picked at by one of these Spelling/Grandma Nazis.

Re:How they become?

[eln]

A lot of people usually get a lot of help writing their resumes. Once they get into the workforce, there is a prevailing myth among the plebes that spelling and grammar don't matter, as long as the message is right. However, this ignores the fact that bad spelling and grammar can severely impact the coherency of any message, as well as hurting the credibility of the author.

There have been several times when advertising departments at places I've worked have let huge glossies and other very visible ads get all the way through printing with major spelling and grammatical errors. How can anyone take a company seriously if it looks like everyone at that company is illiterate?

Re:How they become?

[mordors9]

I work for a fairly large corporation and supervise a group of people. I used to think the spelling mistakes were just typing errors, that all of the grammatical mistakes and punctuation errors were just laziness. Don't get me wrong, I mistype words occasionally and I certainly do not always use perfect grammar. But, I see an awful lot of emails and reports that are nearly incomprehensible. I have also come to the conclusion that an awful lot of people really do not know how to spell or have a basic understanding of grammar. I guess further evidence that our public education system is failing miserably.

Re:How they become?

[Repton]

A man rides into a new town, and needs to get his CV proofread. The town has only two CV proofreaders. So he gets copies of their CVs to help him decide whom to go to. One of the CVs is beautifully presented, with impeccable spelling and grammar and a clear, logical layout. The other is messy, confused, and poorly spelt. There are many obvious grammatical mistakes.

Which proofreader does the man go to, and why?

Re:How they become?

[RealAlaskan]

... bad spelling and grammar can severely impact the coherency of any message, as well as hurting the credibility of the author.

When I was teaching econ, I several times made the mistake of setting an essay test. It showed that the American students couldn't write. When I marked them down for incomprehensiblity, they were shocked! ``You should grade the econ, not the grammer.'' they said. Unfortunately, the grammer and organization was bad enough that there wasn't any coherent content to grade.

Some of them did know the material, but it doesn't matter what you know, if you can't communicate it clearly to others. If you can't communicate, you might as well know nothing, because that's what everyone will assume.

By contrast, some students for whom English was a second language had grammer problems, but their writing was coherent enough that I could figure out what they meant.

Re:How they become?

[Finuvir]

Sloppy writing implies carelessness at best, ineptitude at worst. It's not okay to write badly in a business setting; at least not in inter-business communication.

Re:How they become?

[glitch!]

1. You should have said: "Her problem is that she forgets to proofread."
2. It is "A lot", not "Alot".
3. "Disinterested" means one doesn't have a conflict of interest. You should have used "uninterested".
4. It is "justified", not "justificated".
5. It is "disenfranchised", not "disenfrenchfried", unless someone took away their French fries.


Then again, maybe these were intentional and slashdot just removed the <GWB> and </GWB> tags.

Re:How they become?

[asr_man]

...bad spelling and grammar can severely impact the coherency of any message, as well as hurting the credibility of the author.

"Hurting" above is incorrect. To agree with "impact" it should be "hurt":

Bad spelling and grammar can (do two things...#1:) severely impact...(and #2:) hurt...

But since this forum doesn't support editing, we'll forgive you.

The Grammar Nazis

Re:How they become?

[Moofie]

I think the problem with American schools is related to the fact that they hire teachers that overgeneralize.

Re:How they become?

[tomhudson]

Great, so we can repeatedly get the same (but not necessarily correct) result every time with very little variance.

Ah, grasshopper, now you understand the value of ISO 9001 certification.

Re:How they become?

[Flower]

but the intended recipient still understands the message then who cares?

Everybody should care because the intended recipient may not be the only recipient as a matter is discussed. My emails get forwarded and (b)cc:'d to others all the time and I receive similiar correspondance every day. Concise, understandable emails mean I don't have to repeat myself.

They also stand the test of time. Ever have an email come up a few months or a year later and have to address it? Something well composed is easier to explain than a choppy stream of consciousness.

Sure, its only 20 seconds, but the only point in editing your message is to conform to implied social norms - an objective that has nothing to do with getting the job done. Thankfully those silly social norms have not yet been applied to emails yet.

This shows such a lack of business savvy and professionalism it is actually depressing. You can't even invest half a minute into reviewing your work and making sure it's presentable because in your limited view it has nothing to do with your actual job. The simple fact is that in any organization you don't exist in a vacuum and being able to effectively communicate is a primary job function not some "silly social norm." Save those anarchist tendencies for IRC and /. Whether it is "fair" or not, in a business environment consistently poor writing is going to get you labeled as stupid and inept. The big problem with this is the judgement will many times come from upper management due to the simple fact that your email is the primary work product they see.

Soft skills count and as the job market gets tighter those skills will be the ones that differentiate you from the rest of the pack. It is actually called reality and not "silly social norm."

Re:How they become?

[cduffy]

On the other hand, if the intended recipient is "careless", and by "careless" you really mean lazy or too busy to write in complete sentences, but the intended recipient still understands the message then who cares?

The recipient, for one.

I may be able to interpret poorly written English, but that's not to say it's enjoyable. Presentation errors not only make the individual committing them look bad, but also take away focus from the actual content.

I expect people communicating with me in a business context to make a reasonable effort to communicate clearly in much the same way that I would be offended if a coworker chose to give me messages scribbled in sloppily written crayon: Poor presentation distracts from the content. The scribbled memo would needlessly require extra time to read and interpret; likewise do poorly spelled messages.

Another aspect that falls out of the above is one of respect. Since comprehending sloppily-written messages takes more time and effort, writing well is nothing less than displaying respect for the value of the time of one's readers, whereas writing poorly is stating that your time and effort is more valuable than that of the individual to whom you send your message. I make a serious effort to do this when writing material for others' consumption; consequently, I find it only reasonable for others to respond in kind.

Thankfully those silly social norms have not yet been applied to emails yet.

They should and do. People who send poorly written email (particularly mass mailings) are genuinely and rightly offensive, for all the reasons above.

Re:How they become?

[1u3hr]

why should you waste an extra 20 seconds checking your grammar?

1) So the recipient doesn't have to spend 20 seconds trying to work out what your meant, or wasting both his and your time by replying asking for a clarification.
2) So people don't think you're a moron.
3) So people outside the company don't think you're all morons (if the message is forwarded, as often happens, sometimes inadvertently).

Anything you write, anywhere, can come back to haunt you.

Re:How they become?

[mcrbids]

...and where to put periods and commas (overuse of which are probably the most common non-spelling error I see)...

I, for one, welcome, to the full extent possible, our new, lovely, comma, overlords!

Conspicuously...

[MoxCamel]

This wasn't posted by CmdrTaco. I'm just saying.

Mox

All because of vatican 2

[yorkpaddy]

See what happens when you stop saying mass in Latin.

Re:I'd be happy

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it is not.

If people could just learn to write their replies BELOW what they're quoting. Top posting is just wrong.

My personal favorite

[Anonymous Crowhead]

The subject line email:

Subject: COULD YOU SEND ME THAT MEMO
Body: (empty)

In case it's slashdotted:

[Anonymous Coward]

R. cr4ig h094n, 4 PhORm3R UNIVeR5ItY Profe$$OR WH0 He4D5 4N 0nliN3 5CH0oL f0R bU51NE55 WrI+in9 H3R3, R3Ce1VeD @N aN9uishED E-M@iL meS549e ReceNtLy frOM 4 pRo$P3c+1vE 5+uDEnT.

"1 NeED HeLp," 54Id +H3 MEs54G3, whiCh w4$ Dev01d oph PuNC+UA+ion. "1 am WR1+1nG @ e$$4Y 0n wRI+iN9 I W0Rk ph0R TH1$ C0mp4nY @nd my 8O5s W4N+ me +0 h3lP IMpR0V3 tEh w0rKer$ WRItin9 5K1ll5 c4n y4ll H3lp me w1TH $0m3 InpHoRm4+I0N +h@nK y0U".

HuNdR3d5 0Ph 1NkWIR1ES Phrom m4n49ER5 AND EXECU+iveS 5E3K1NG To 1MPR0vE Th31R 0WNZOR oR +HEiR woRKeR$' wRi+1N9 pOp In+O HOG4N'$ 80XoR In-B45K3T E4cH mONth, He 5AY5, D3SCRIBIn9 4 nUMb3r +H4+ H@S $uRg3D @5 3-M4IL H45 R3Pl4C3D +He pHoN3 PHor mUCH WORkPLac3 COmMuNiCaT1ON. mIll1On$ 0Ph 3MPLOY33S Mu5+ WR1Te M0RE FR3kWentLY 0n teH J0b +h@N pr3VI0u5lY. 4ND ManY @r3 M@k1nG 4 h4$h Of 1t.

"E-m@1L 1$ 4 PArTY +0 wHIch eNgLI$H TE4Ch3R5 H4VE NO+ BEEn 1nvIt3D," HO94n $41d. "it HA$ C0Mp4Nie5 +34riNG +h3ir h@1r oU+."

@ REc3nt SUrV3y Of 120 4MER1C4n COrp0r4T10NS RE4CHeD 4 5IMIl@r coNCLu51On. +HE $TUdY, by +3H N@+I0n@L cOMM1$$Ion On WR1tInG, 4 p4N3L 35+48Li$h3D 8Y teh CoLl39E 8OaRD, c0NCLud3d +H4t @ th1Rd Oph 3MPloY335 1n +HE N4+1on'5 8LUe-ch1P CoMP4N1E5 wro+3 pO0RLy AND +h@+ bU5iNE5$E5 Were 5PEnD1nG 4$ mUcH 45 $3.1 b1LLioN @NnUally On reM3D1@l TR4InING.

+hE PR08lem 5h0W5 UP N0+ onLY IN 3-ma1L Bu+ 4lSO in R3pORT5 4ND 0tH3r T3xt5, +h3 COMMi5$I0n 5@Id.

"1T'S N0+ +ha+ C0mP4N1Es w4NT +0 HIRE t0l5T0y," $@Id $U5AN +R4im4n, 4 dIrecToR @+ TH3 BU$1ne$5 R0unDt4bL3, 4n @$50Cia+1ON Of l34d1N9 CH1EPH EX3cU+1Ve5 wH0sE c0rP0R4+10N5 W3r3 $URVeY3D 1N tH3 $TUDY. "BUt +H3Y n33D P3oPLE WH0 C4N WrItE cl3@RLY, 4ND M4NY 3mpl0yEE$ AnD @PPl1C4Nt5 F4lL 5h0rT 0F th@T $+4nD4rD."

m1LliON5 OF IN5CRU+@BL3 E-M4iL Me$$4935 4RE CLO991n9 C0rpoR@T3 B0X0r5 BY 5e+TIN9 OfF r3kWE5+$ pHor Cl4r1PHIC4+10N, @nd M@nY 0Ph +HE ReKWE5T5, IN +uRn, 4Re 4L5o CH40TICaLly Wri+T3N, R3$ULtIN9 1N whoL3 CyCle5 0f CoNpHUS1on.

h3RE 15 0NE fr0M @ $Y5+3mS 4N4Ly5+ T0 heR 5UpERvI5OR @T 4 H1gh-+eCH CORpOR@tiON B453D 1N paL0 @l+O, C@LIF.: "i uPD4T3D +Eh 5t@+U$ REp0rt For +h3 FOuR D1$Cr3P@NCie5 l3NnIe PH0RwARd u5 VI4 E-M4il (TheY 1N 8arRY PhIl3).. tO MAKE $URE MY l0G1C w4$ C0rr3C+ I+ $e3M5 We pR0v1De MUrR4Y With 1nc0rreC+ 1NPh0RM4t1oN ... h0WEv3R 4PHt3r veRipHY1ng cON+R0lS 0N jbl - JBL H45 TH3 inDIcatOR @5 B ???? - 1 w@n+3D +O M4Ke 5ur3 WItH tH3 R3cen+ CH4Ng35 - I pR0C355ED TOd4Y - 8EFoR3 mURr4y M4Ke thE CH@NG35 494iN 0n T3h M4INphr@me +0 'c'."

+He 1NC0h3R3NC3 0F +h@+ mE$5@GE PeR5u4DEd +Eh @N@LysT'5 eMPl0yer5 +H4t 5H3 N33ded r3MEDi4L +r4In1ng.

"tH3 MORE ELEC+Ron1C 4ND gLoB@l w3 G3+, +hE L355 IMp0R+4NT +h3 Sp0KEn wORD hA5 b3COME, 4nd iN e-M41l CL@ri+Y 15 CrITIc4l," $@1d S3@N PhIlLip$, R3CrU1tMEnT d1R3CTOR AT @NO+HEr $iL1C0N v4llEy CORp0R4Ti0n, 4ppl3r4, @ 5UPpl13R 0F 3KW1PMEnT pHOr L1PH3 $cIENC3 R3$3@RCH, wh3RE Mo5t

Very Inprofesional

[Lieutenant_Dan]

I find it lidicrous how people making 100000$ or more a year, just canot spell or at least use the spelchecker.

It's a disgracement.

Re:Very Inprofesional

[porkUpine]

I wish I could mod your post +1 (Sad but True). Our CFO sends out company wide emails that make no sense at all. I often wonder how she was able to (lie/cheat/steal) her way into that position. It is embarrassing when the CFO of a 1+Billion dollar a year company cannot tell the difference between patience/patients or capitol/capital. Now, I'm not perfect... but I also don't send out company wide email very often. When I do have to send out email to others in the company I do this old fashioned thing called "Proof-reading". *sigh* (sad but true)

i m a l337 riter!

[bennomatic]

People just don't care anymore, do they? Capitalization, their-they're-there, you're-your, mixing tenses, dangling modifiers, unclear use of pronouns and run-on sentences are just a few of the most common problems. My wife has finally given me the validation I need in that she has me look over official correspondence she writes because I am, in her words, the grammar police.

My spelling's pretty good, too, but not perfect, so no flames please!

Sad but true.

[slusich]

Far too many professionals simply cannot manage to type out a readable email. People with college degrees in high paying jobs should have some degree of competency with the English language. I have to wonder if this has less to do with the format of email and more to do with the disappearance of secretaries.

Re:Sad but true.

[Incongruity]

I have to wonder if this has less to do with the format of email and more to do with the disappearance of secretaries.

That's a good point. Much like the web allows almost anyone to publish just about whatever they want, it seems that technology has also allowed every idiot to [and those of us who just play idiots in print =) ] to escape the watchful eyes of those more skilled at proper correspondence. Sometimes lowering the barriers to entry (as technology such as email and the internet do) do more than just let more people get in on it -- it also lets more crap in with all the good.

Illiterate? Or just unprofessional?

[beeplet]

It seems like there are two separate possible problems here: people are coming into a company without the writing skills they need, and/or employees are not treating email communication with the same professionalism as other company documents.

For the first problem, either a) don't hire people who can't write, or b) provide on-the job training to bring writing skills up to an acceptable level.

For the second, I think the company needs to make a clear set of standards for both internal and external communication, and enforce them. External communication - to customers, etc. - is particularly important. Anything as badly written as those examples would be deleted from my inbox before I got to the end of the first sentence.

I used to work as a technical writer for a large company, and they kept us busy. It's fine to hire engineers who are good at what they do, even if they don't have great writing skills - as log as you also hire someone to decipher and rewrite everything that comes out of the engineering dept.

PS. I respectfully submit that the headline should read either "The illegibility of email" or "The illiteracy of corporate america"... I might try to make my email literary, but not literate (and my slashdot posts are probably neither...) :)

Spelling And Grammar Still Apply

[A Red Pikmin]

For some reason I've never understood, a lot of people seem to think that because they write electronically, they don't have to spell correctly or use proper grammar. And even if they are naturally bad at such things, it's not like most e-mail clients lack spelling and/or grammar checks. I have no idea why people do this; especially in a situation like this where the writing is more formal and precise. Although for myself, I've conformed to more or less standard writing form in electronic communications.

Spell Czech

[Easy2RememberNick]

Eye halve a spelling chequer. It came with my pea sea.
It plainly marques four my revue miss steaks eye kin knot sea.

Eye strike a key and type a word and weight four it two say
Weather eye am wrong oar write. It shows me strait a weigh.

As soon as a mist ache is maid. It nose bee fore two long
And eye can put the error rite. Its rarely ever wrong.

Eye have run this poem threw it. I am shore your pleased two no.
Its letter perfect in it's weight. My chequer tolled me sew.

Sauce Unknown

(Reader's Digest.)

Holy crap!

[wolfemi1]

Corporate American e-mail can't read?

1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d

[Triumph The Insult C]

s0? irc rul3z. ema!l iz 4 lam3rz n3way

Obligory quote

[DragonPup]

"Me fail english? That unpossible!"

Re:Have they ever heard of English as a 2nd langua

[Ahnteis]

Newsflash: In corporate AMERICA, English is required learning.

Newsflash 2: People who speak English as a second language are often better at correct grammar then native English-speakers.

Re:Not too suprising

[calibanDNS]

More amusingly, that's an apostrophe, not a "commar"...

ESL musings

[MarcoAtWork]

Most people who learn English as a second language tend to have a very good command of its written form; this is because in most schools abroad English is taught following a grammar-first/speech-later approach.

My spoken English, and especially my understanding of it, has improved by leaps and bounds since I started living in an English speaking country (Canada). I wish I could say the same about my writing: due to being constantly exposed to your/you're and similar constructs, I feel its quality has definitely decreased.

Re:I filtered out all the crap

[cephyn]

Wow, there was a Welsh version of the site?

Re:I'd be happy

[cain]

If people could just learn to I prefer replying
write their replies BELOW on the SIDE of
what they're quoting. what I am quoting, myself.
Top posting is just wrong. Side posting r00ls, w00t!!

What scares me

[mindstrm]

is that I can read that quite fluently.

Don't forget about typing skills...

[AGTiny]

I honesty can't stand to even deal with someone who uses shorthand such as "u" or "ur". I think that one of the causes of this is poor typing skills. If you can't type fast enough, "u" or "ur" is easier than typing "you" or "your". These people must just assume people don't mind reading that garbage.

Spend some of that $3.1B on typing skills as well as language skills!

spelling and grammar?

[Anonymous Cowpat]

clicky
The geniuses suceeded in publishing a report with a map on the front which just had a gap where Wales should have been.
Stuff Spelling and Grammar, 3 million people and a few billion sheep just ceased to exist!

Exactly.

[FreeLinux]

Time is money. The problem is that much more time is wasted trying to decipher poorly written emails than, if the writer had taken the time to write it properly in the first place. The problem is even worse when the writing is so poorly done that it conveys a different message than was intended. In fact, just such an example was given in the article.

Indeed, your own post is another example of time wasted due to poor writing skills. It was necessary for me to read your message two or three times in order to determine your meaning. A properly written post would not have required rereading. My time was further wasted by replying to your post with this chastizing comment. You now owe me $2.00

Another issue: Netiquette

[stwrtpj]

The problem I run into at my job is not so much spelling and grammar. I fortunately run into very few problems with that. What sets my teeth on edge is lack of basic netiquette skills.

For instance, I cringe when I see someone reply to a long email outlining multiple points in a discussion, only to see the person head the message with "My comments below IN CAPS". This person then proceeds to do just that, namely give all her comments in all uppercase. Ugh. There is no need for this. It is very clear what is quoted text and what is not quoted text.

Another one that is rampant at my company is top-posting. Everyone insists on quoting a message in a reply and proceeding to post their comments at the top. When I try to lead by example and properly bottom-post, people complain my emails are not clear. Argh.

At least I no longer have a boss like I did on my last job. She wrote her emails in all lowercase and used HTML blink tags.

This is the worst they can come up with?

[Mazem]

As evidence the article cites the following quote:
"I updated the Status report for the four discrepancies Lennie forward us via e-mail (they in Barry file).. to make sure my logic was correct It seems we provide Murray with incorrect information ... However after verifying controls on JBL - JBL has the indicator as B ???? - I wanted to make sure with the recent changes - I processed today - before Murray make the changes again on the mainframe to 'C'."

The reason why that message seems so "incomprehensible" is not because of the poor writing but rather because we, the not-intended readers, do not have knowledge of the systems discussed in the email.

Actually the quote looks like it would be quite understandable if I knew
(1) what the status reports were,
(2) what the Barry file is
(3) who Murray is
(4) what "information" they provided
(5) the details of the technobable at the end of the email.
Clearly all of these are things the intended recipient would already know.

I could write an email about an advanced physics topic using perfect grammar and spelling and it would be no more comprehensible to the average reader than this email.

If that is the worst they can come up with than corporate America is in good shape.

To her, it probably was correct...

[EvilStein]

After all, Outlook automatically corrects your spelling for you as you type.

"patience" is spelled correctly. In context, it's probably the wrong word, but it's still spelled correctly.

I've seen that happen quite a few times - people relying on the Outlook/Word spellchecked and it corrects their email by inserting correctly spelled, but irrelevant words.
The CxO drones don't even notice it.

Again, Dijkstra said it best.

[devphil]

IMHO, if an engineer is imprecise in his language, in any medium, he will be imprecise in other more important areas.

Just a couple weeks ago this comment made sense, and hey, now it makes sense even more.

Grammer?

[Cybertect]

Perhaps it's just another Americanism, but over here in England we spell it 'grammar' :)

Tolstoy?!?

[grcumb]

From TFA: "It's not like we're trying to hire Tolstoy."

It's a damn good thing, too. The last thing corporate America needs is a 2000 page corporate org chart in which Alexei Sergeyevich has dotted line responsibility for Sergey Alexeyevich, and both of them are in love with Anya Lamentova (who is referred to half the time as Anyushka, making it look like these two are chasing different women so what's the problem?), and by the time Napoleon finally retreats from Moscow and Sergey Alexeyevich has recovered from the duel with Alexei (Sasha) Sergeyevich we haven't even come close to our quarterly projections and don't give a shit about any of it any more and spend our entire day checking the want ads.

It's nothing new

[M. Silver]

I worked as a secretarial temp in college, and let me tell you: executives have *never* been terribly literate (well, at least since the 80's; I assume it wasn't much different before that). It's only that they used to have secretaries type their correspondence, so nobody knew.

Ode to a Spell Checker

[pipingguy]

Someone other than me originally wrote this. My apologies to non-native English-speakers, as this is bound to do some brane damage to those that do their best to try to comprehend:

I have a spelling checker.
It came with my PC.
It plane lee marks four my revue
Miss steaks aye can knot sea.

Eye ran this poem threw it,
Your sure reel glad two no.
Its vary polished in it's weigh,
My checker tolled me sew.

A checker is a bless sing,
It freeze yew lodes of thyme.
It helps me right awl stiles two reed,
And aides me when aye rime.

Each frays come posed up on my screen
Eye trussed to bee a joule.
The checker poured ore every word
To cheque sum spelling rule.

Be fore a vailing checkers
Hour spelling mite decline,
And if were lacks o'er have a laps,
We wood bee maid to wine.

Butt now bee cause my spelling
Is checked with such grate flare,
Their are know faults with in my cite,
Of nun aye am a wear.

Now spelling does knot phase me,
It does knot bring a tier.
My pay purrs awl due glad den
With wrapped words fare as hear.

To rite with care is quite a feet
Of witch won should be proud.
And wee mussed dew the best wee can,
Sew flaws are knot aloud.

Sow ewe can sea why aye dew prays
Such soft ware for pea seas,
And why I brake in two averse
When righting what aye pleas.

"New York Times" is guilty too

[peter hoffman]

It's not just corporate email. The "New York Times" now routinely spells "NASCAR" as "Nascar" as well as mangling other acronyms. I have written to them several times to find out what is going on but they haven't replied. I think it's the result of using MS Word which has a nasty tendency to downcase things.

Since we're on the subject, I'll bring up a related complaint: I think the program which checks your spelling is a "spelling checker" and not a "spell checker" (unless you're some sort of warlock or witch). I know, I need to relax and get used to it but it does bother me.

Politics and the English Language

[gidds]

While I heartily agree with all the posters deploring the current state of English as she is typed, I think the problems are deeper than just spelling and grammar. While they are the most obvious problems -- the easiest to spot, criticise, and correct -- if people aren't thinking clearly, then no amount of elegant grammar and immaculate spelling will convert their muddled ideas into clear and direct text.

The author George Orwell wrote an article about this in 1945; I find it a very interesting read, and probably even more relevant today. (It seems remarkably prescient in many respects.) It's called Politics and the English Language, but don't let the title put you off: it's not about politics per se, just about how writers (mis)use English in various types of writing, political and otherwise.

It's online in many places, for example here and here. Well worth a read.

Re:Consistantly?

[tomhudson]

Progris repert 1

My naam is charly gordon. i am playing. with a mouse. named Aljernun. He is kute. The dockters say that after i have my operashun: i will b as smart as Aljernun. Maybe evun smartur.

That wood be fun. Right now; Aljernun can run the maize faster. than me.

Aljernun is a funny naam. His naam shud be miky. Ever body knows! that mouses ar naamd miky. I seed it on the tv.

Scary thought when corporate emails sound like they're written by Charlie Gordon with an IQ of 68, or, in some cases, Algernon running across a keyboard stepping on keys at random.

True story

[windowpain]

I'm an independent film producer. For my latest shoot I placed an ad on Craig's List. Here's a reply I got:

"hello, i am a freelance makeup artist who is also a film student. i have worked on many productions in the philadelphia area including film, video, commercial, print etc.. i would love to work on your project. give ma a call @ 267-nnn-nnnn. thank you
Christy McCabe"

My reply:

"Hello,

I appreciate your interest in Dangerous Movies. We're hip, we're independent and we're unconventional. We have no confidence, however, in people who do not know enough to use proper grammar in business correspondence. The rules for capitalization have not been repealed. And it's obvious you did not proofread your email before sending it out. If you're that careless in trying to get the gig, how careful are you going to be on the job?

I hope you accept this advice in the spirit in which it was given: not to put you down, but to educate you."

Her reply to my reply:

"you are a complete asshole. it is common knowledge that when sending an e mail, all rules of capitalization are thrown out the window. thank you for saving me from having to work on a shitty movie with a bunch of pompous assholes such as yourself. i hope your movie never makes any money.
fuck off."

I'm afraid Miss McCabe's attitude is not unusual among young people these days. She's not merely ignorant. She's indignant when someone is kind enough to try to help her out. Not to mention vulgar and hateful.