Why is the RMWeb forum full of such smug gits ?
I set up a post on there simply stating the shop would be opening, the first repley was:
QuoteTim Hall
Member
Send message Add as Friend
Members
PipPip
234 posts
LocationCardiff
Posted Today, 19:57
Well I've found an error in the first section I looked at ..... :stinker:
Why couldn't he just give me the heads up and say what the error is?
I'd just give him the Foxtrot Oscar treatment................... :D
Because we are a much nicer lot on this forum :)
Quote from: dannyboy on April 25, 2016, 08:52:47 AM
Because we are a much nicer lot on this forum :)
This much is true :NGF:
Quote from: dannyboy on April 25, 2016, 08:52:47 AM
Because we are a much nicer lot on this forum :)
As for the member of RMewb
I think he needs to told to go forth and multiply :P
funny that , our PC got virus , the computer guy returned it fixed and asked , ''what was you doing?'' , said I was on RM Web so he clicked over and next thing , it caught us again so the guy took the computer away again ...
needles to say I steer clear of that forum .
It's an excellent place to go to for prototype information, though in the modelling sections I get the impression if you're not scratchbuilding your own stuff out of lumps of coal and rusty nails you're not a proper modeller.
Did you ever find the 'error'? If not, I suspect it involves the Dutch liveried grampus on the front page (00 model illustrating an N gauge model).
You get the lemons on every forum unfortunately... RMWeb being the size it is naturally has more of them than most, but is nothing compared to the Scale 4 forum which is probably the worst model railway forum I've come across but even that is tame compared to some prototype forums...
As for the particular character in question, he has form and a quick browse of his previous posts will show how much (little) he has contributed and how much weight you should give to his opinions... :dunce:
Not nice, that.
Did you double-check the announced Opening Date, Graham?
Dave G
Graham. You have the apostrophe in Loco's in one of the changing heading banners. Maybe he thinks this is wrong - seems debatable to me as the apostrophe marks the missing letters in Locomotives.
Quote from: woodbury22uk on April 25, 2016, 07:16:40 PM
as the apostrophe marks the missing letters
That's what I was always taught :thumbsup:
Plural of "loco" is "locos".
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/loco (http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/loco)
Cheers, NeMo
I do not want to sound pedantic, but surely 'loco', in this context, is just a shortened version of 'locomotive', so is the apostrophe just denoting that there are missing letters :). Anyway, better shut up now as this has got way off topic. :beers:
Quote from: Graham Walters on April 24, 2016, 11:28:25 PM
Why couldn't he just give me the heads up and say what the error is?
I expect he doesn't have much going on in his life, the poor little bean.
Talking of 'heads up' I believe this is the culprit.
[smg id=12544]
Not the first time the attitudes of Tim Hall have appeared on these pages .....
http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?topic=19655.0 (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?topic=19655.0)
So at the same time as professing how much more friendly the NGF is than RMWeb some take it upon themselves to insult Tim (who is a genuinely nice guy)....ironic really.
Tim is a software tester by trade so it is hardly surprising he might have found a bug (plenty of people have with our Revolution Trains website!). OK in an ideal world he would have said what it was, but given time he still might or Graham could always PM him...
Anyway can we stop the personal attacks...
Quote from: dannyboy on April 25, 2016, 08:16:32 PM
I do not want to sound pedantic, but surely 'loco', in this context, is just a shortened version of 'locomotive', so is the apostrophe just denoting that there are missing letters :). Anyway, better shut up now as this has got way off topic. :beers:
Nope, "loco" is an accepted word in this context, so no apostrophe required, "loco's" offends my sensibilities (indeed I thought Graham was changing it). No different to "photo's". It's not a contraction.
Quote from: njee20 on April 25, 2016, 10:45:21 PM
Quote from: dannyboy on April 25, 2016, 08:16:32 PM
I do not want to sound pedantic, but surely 'loco', in this context, is just a shortened version of 'locomotive', so is the apostrophe just denoting that there are missing letters :). Anyway, better shut up now as this has got way off topic. :beers:
Nope, "loco" is an accepted word in this context, so no apostrophe required, "loco's" offends my sensibilities (indeed I thought Graham was changing it). No different to "photo's". It's not a contraction.
I realise that we are all entitled to our opinion, but I still say that 'loco' is a contraction, as is 'photo' -
Contraction (grammar) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contraction_(grammar)
A contraction is a shortened version of the written and spoken forms of a word, syllable, or word group, created by omission of internal letters and sounds.
Anyway, as I said, we are getting off topic - sorry Mods - and on that note, I am going to bed. :)
If the contracted word discussion continues much more
I'm going to crack my Edward Woodward joke... ;D
Quote from: dannyboy on April 25, 2016, 08:16:32 PM
I realise that we are all entitled to our opinion, but I still say that 'loco' is a contraction, as is 'photo' -
Contraction (grammar) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contraction_(grammar)
A contraction is a shortened version of the written and spoken forms of a word, syllable, or word group, created by omission of internal letters and sounds.
Anyway, as I said, we are getting off topic - sorry Mods - and on that note, I am going to bed. :)
Hi there,
The article you link to points out that contraction is different to clipping, which is what is happening when photograph or locomotive are shortened.
Words can be clipped from the front, middle or end - eg parachute to 'chute, influenza to 'flu, examination to exam - but the apostrophe is omitted when clipping from the back to avoid confusion between plurals and possessives - eg the plural of lab is labs, never lab's, though you might switch off the lab's lights as you leave.
Cheers
Ben A.
Oh, i like some of his photos of Cornwall, if not some things he has said about said railways - Just an outsider looking in was my view though - not everyone knows everything do they :)
Some of his views are not mine :D
Quote from: PLD on April 25, 2016, 06:46:31 PM
You get the lemons on every forum unfortunately... RMWeb being the size it is naturally has more of them than most, but is nothing compared to the Scale 4 forum which is probably the worst model railway forum I've come across but even that is tame compared to some prototype forums...
As for the particular character in question, he has form and a quick browse of his previous posts will show how much (little) he has contributed and how much weight you should give to his opinions... :dunce:
Would you care to expand on why the Scalefour Society Forum is "the worst", I really would like to know what brings you to that conclusion? Do tell all :)
Back on topic, I can't understand why he couldn't just list the actual mistake in the first place. We all make mistakes and putting together a website involves writing a lot of copy.
I've seen mistakes in newspapers, on websites and even in one of the banner adverts on RMWeb.
I like the design of the website very much by the way, it is clean and uncluttered.
:NGaugersRule:
Quote from: dannyboy on April 25, 2016, 08:16:32 PM
I do not want to sound pedantic, but surely 'loco', in this context, is just a shortened version of 'locomotive', so is the apostrophe just denoting that there are missing letters :). Anyway, better shut up now as this has got way off topic. :beers:
Very fair point, but I think it's just a customary thing. Some words become shortened and the shorter version becomes a word in its own right --
phone and
plane for example -- and we don't normally write these as
'phone or
'plane, though you could and be 100% right in doing so. Putting the apostrophes into words like
can't,
won't and
hasn't is different because without them they aren't accepted words, and in the case of
can't and
won't, they'd be confused with the words
cant and
wont that mean completely different things.
I was a professional writer for magazines and websites 10+ years, and continue to write for money alongside my day job. As Silly Moo points out, it's difficult to get it completely right all the time. It's especially difficult to proof read your own writing. I would *strongly* encourage anyone building a website to have someone they know to be highly literate to read through anything they've written.
Nothing diminishes the professional look of a website more than poor spelling and grammar. It's a bit like wearing a smart suit and shiny shoes to an interview. Doesn't mean you're better at your job, but if you don't "scrub up" before the interview, people will notice and form judgements about you.
Cheers, NeMo
Quote from: silly moo on April 26, 2016, 06:19:21 AM
Back on topic, I can't understand why he couldn't just list the actual mistake in the first place. We all make mistakes and putting together a website involves writing a lot of copy.
I've seen mistakes in newspapers, on websites and even in one of the banner adverts on RMWeb.
Because it offers the poster a smug sense of satisfaction. Doesn't make him a terrible person, although it's not overly helpful admittedly.
Agree with NeMo on the spelling and grammar, I have to say I'm terrible for judging based on that sort of thing. If a company can't get that right what else may they have missed?!
Quote from: Claude Dreyfus on April 25, 2016, 06:29:00 PM
Did you ever find the 'error'? If not, I suspect it involves the Dutch liveried grampus on the front page (00 model illustrating an N gauge model).
It's a good spot, and one Dapol missed because it was they who supplied the image
Quote from: woodbury22uk on April 25, 2016, 07:16:40 PM
Graham. You have the apostrophe in Loco's in one of the changing heading banners. Maybe he thinks this is wrong - seems debatable to me as the apostrophe marks the missing letters in Locomotives.
I don't think the person concerned is that literate to be honest :hmmm:
Changed the offending slide :bounce:
Quote from: railsquid on April 25, 2016, 04:18:58 PM
It's an excellent place to go to for prototype information, though in the modelling sections I get the impression if you're not scratchbuilding your own stuff out of lumps of coal and rusty nails you're not a proper modeller.
It's funny you should mention this, lookig back through this Aprils edition of BRM magazine a survey of members reveals that the majority of them ( by a long way) only build locomotive or rolling stock kits, havve one or more on the go, less than a fifth said they never have have a kit ofn the go.
We are talkig loco and rolling stock kits here.
Are BRM sure they want this information made public, is it worth me as and advertiser only advertising to the minority in the hobby ?
I am very carefully considering whether the amount of Parkside Kits I stock warrant a £140 per month advert in the magazine!