Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

Interesting review on the US National Guard

Mar 16, 2004 1:43PM PST

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Re:Interesting indeed... nt
Mar 16, 2004 9:14PM PST

.

- Collapse -
Not totally accurate but...
Mar 18, 2004 2:04AM PST
- Collapse -
Well, I've eaten my words and read your post.
Mar 18, 2004 10:09PM PST

(That's not an invitation to subject all my posts to microscopy).

Interesting. However, it lacks a degree of credibility due to lack of editorial review.

==================


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: http://www.ngb.army.mil/ngbgomo/history/ngbhist.htm
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 00:01:13 +1000
From: Ian Clark <aperson@somewhere>
To: mailto:gomailbox@ngb.ang.af.mil


I am sending from Australia. Whether you act on this message or not is
your business.

I read the above link as it was provided in response to my posting to a
USA website an interesting other link about the USA national guard.

Whilst the site above is very informative, it is disappointing to see
paragraphs where obviously a sentence or two has been lost, let alone
the number of spelling errors and wordsruntogether which would have been
picked up by a simple spelling check.

The site was informative and interesting. I'll long wonder what the
truncated paragraphs intended to say.

Ian Clark
Gladstone, QLD
Australia

- Collapse -
No need to 'eat' your words, but I am curious...
Mar 18, 2004 11:08PM PST

about your post. I posted the link(s) to be used in conjunction with yours.

You indicate many misspellings and run together words in the link--Copying the entire text to Word and running a spell checker reveals NONE (suggested misspellings are person's names and miliraty ranks).

No runtogether words were found either.

You might take a look at the font face your own browser defaults to as some will make spaces between words appear to not exist. For instance in Mozilla (on a monitor set at 1600 x 1200) using Times New Roman as the Serif font and Arial as the Sans-serif font and Lucinda Console as the Monospace font in 12 PX at a display resolution of 72dpi, many of the words do appear to be run together until you look very closely.

Did you actually run a spell check or just go by appearances?

- Collapse -
ran a spell check,
Mar 19, 2004 7:40PM PST

and used the USA spell checker, not the OZ.

Ian

- Collapse -
So can you point out the SPECIFIC problems...
Mar 20, 2004 3:44AM PST

because as I said, I spell checked the entire page and found NONE excepting names and ranks and found NO runtogether words.

It is not a dynamic page so the contents don't change from view to view.

- Collapse -
Same here...
Mar 20, 2004 11:03AM PST
I spell checked the entire page and found NONE excepting names and ranks and found NO runtogether words.

I checked it with Word and OpenOffice and found only the same things that you did, mainly people's names. I also read the article and couldn't find any run together words.

- Collapse -
Well, I guess I'll just have to go back to ignoring you.
Mar 20, 2004 9:12PM PST

I notice you overlooked Whilst the site above is very informative, it is disappointing to see
paragraphs where obviously a sentence or two has been lost
which is vastly more important than the result of your normal microscopy of my posts.

I find the credibility of Ed raises extreme scepticism, as you always selectively address my posts.

Ah well. Bye Bye, sleep well.

Ian

I shall privilege you with one example, an example which proves in attacking me you used technology and not your eyes.

l~sub~945~/sub~ is NOT 1945.

regards

- Collapse -
In other words YOU can't point to any specific 'problems'?
Mar 21, 2004 1:01AM PST

I don't think my request to point out SPECIFIC problems was out of the ordinary as I had ALREADY stated that I had found none.

If you can't point out specific misspellings and runtogether words and EVERYONE who spell checks the page can not find any either it is NOT my credibility but YOURS that suffers Ian.

While I strongly doubt, it the problem could be MY spell checker but without your pointing out those specifics that is pretty impossible to check on.

See someone about that nose.

- Collapse -
Re:In other words YOU can't point to any specific 'problems'?
Mar 21, 2004 9:01PM PST

"When the freeze on annual leave was limited in l945 civilian employees were compelled to use their leave or lose it."

"At the war's end the National Guard Bureau desperately need what should be here?edits full military and civilian staff"

"After World War II the National Guard Bureau and the Army Air Forces jointly prepared a plan for the Air National Guard. Among the for seeable foreseeable problems"

The fact that you didn't bother to read your linked article is obvious, and expected. The fact that your having ONE supporting post gives you the feeling you can say "everyone" is ridiculous, but also expected.

The fact that you ignored "I notice you overlooked:
Whilst the site above is very informative, it is disappointing to see paragraphs where obviously a sentence or two has been lost which is vastly more important than the result of your normal microscopy of my posts. is to be expected of your microscopy approach to all subjects.

You ignore the topic, so you may attack a single point from a complexity, then hammer that single point until the nail bends in your direction.

It may be a wonderful tool in a debating competition. Its nit picking crap in a forum.

Ian

goodbye

- Collapse -
Re:Re:In other words YOU can't point to any specific 'problems'?
Mar 21, 2004 11:23PM PST

#1: l945 hardly merits an email to the website owner.

#2: How about "desparately needed its" as opposed to "need edits" -- probably a line break, and again hardly merits an email.

#3: You are again correct. Could have provided that to the forum and in your email if your intent was to improve the errors rather than attack Ed. It is also not flagged by a spell checker.

So that makes three errors, and so far no run together words. It is you who seem to ignore that Ed praised your link and merely offered more information. There is a saying about no good deed going unpunished. Over 3400 words and you wish to hang on three errors? Two of which are inconsequential in understanding the text, and the third that muddles a point a little. How dare they post such!

- Collapse -
Ian, I've forgotten.
Mar 21, 2004 11:36PM PST

Why did you stop posting for a few weeks? How could you stand to miss out on these thrilling exchanges of ideas and world visions.

I better run a spell check on this.

Wink

I hope you don't take another break, Ian.

Dan

- Collapse -
I've been spending most of my on-line time in a software
Mar 29, 2004 8:18PM PST

forum.

I dare not say its name, I'll be accused of SPAM.

Its been quite a pleasure talking technical with I.T. experts, who appreciate my systems analysis skills.

Of course, it could be considered a bit stupid of me, as I'm providing free consulting, still, that's OK. The end result will be a vastly enhanced commercial product, one used daily by my family.

regards

Ian

- Collapse -
Well thank you for the SPECIFICS asked for earlier. Was it so difficult?
Mar 22, 2004 7:51AM PST
"When the freeze on annual leave was limited in l945 civilian employees were compelled to use their leave or lose it."

the 1945 shows as 1945 in my browser and in MS Word in its "Georgia" font face and spell checking finds NO PROBLEM. VERY CLOSE examination shows that the typist may have used a lower case L rather than a 1 (one) which is common among old typists--I do it myself sometimes if I am not paying attention.

"At the war's end the National Guard Bureau desperately need what should be here?edits full military and civilian staff"

Here you actually found a minor problem where the typist spaced at the wrong point and the spell checker didn't catch it. Try reading it as "desperately needed its full". Nothing missing, just a typo of the type that editors quite often miss even during proofreading.

Now, I read it and suggested reading in conjunction with your link. The GROSS errors you complained of are non esistant although you did seem to find one small typo.

You said "Whilst the site above is very informative, it is disappointing to see paragraphs where obviously a sentence or two has been lost, let alone the number of spelling errors and wordsruntogether which would have been picked up by a simple spelling check." and that just isn't true Ian.

Where are these other "paragraphs" you complain of?
- Collapse -
Re:Interesting review -- BIN LADEN HIDING SPOT IDENTIFIED!
Mar 18, 2004 4:21AM PST

Pentagon officials now believe they have been unable to locate Bin Laden because he has found a place to hide out where (1) it is easy to get in if you have the money; (2) no one will recognize or remember you; (3) no one will realize that you have disappeared; (4) no one keeps any records of your comings and goings; and (5) you have no obligations or responsibilities.

The analysts are still puzzled, however, as to how Bin Laden found out about the Texas Air National Guard in the first place.

-- Dave K.
Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

- Collapse -
**OUCH! ! !*** -nt
Mar 18, 2004 4:33AM PST

.

- Collapse -
Kudos to the chef
Mar 18, 2004 12:12PM PST
- Collapse -
nt) WOW - and you're still living :-), I've seen a later message
Mar 18, 2004 10:04PM PST

.

- Collapse -
Very clever...
Mar 18, 2004 11:14PM PST

Who is the unknown author?

- Collapse -
Maybe its DK -
Mar 19, 2004 8:04PM PST

I only found 25 references to it in Google.

Ian

- Collapse -
I find the last sentence telling
Mar 20, 2004 10:39AM PST

It hasn?t helped that National Guardsmen serving in Iraq are having a hard time getting paid. The General Accounting Office recently reported that of 481 soldiers in six Guard units surveyed, 450 had gotten paychecks with major errors, or no paychecks at all.

- Collapse -
Re:I find the last sentence telling
Mar 22, 2004 10:34PM PST

I find that last sentence amazing and infuriating. I know they all volunteered, but to take them away from their lives and then to give them pay hassles is just to much. We've been waging war for a long time. You'd think that we could do a better job of the paperwork by now.

I wonder how those 31 got the correct pay. It must have been a mistake.

If this kind of insulting treatment were not so atrocious it would be funny.

Dan

- Collapse -
AMEN
Mar 24, 2004 9:02AM PST

No matter what our opinions of right or wrong of this war, no matter what our opinions of this administration, I hope we can all agree that such as this is deplorable.

It's just as wrong for regular military personnel, but considering that many national guard have their income drastically reduce while away from their normal job on active duty, it's even a large hardship on them. Yes, I know they collected payment for a time without much hardship. And I'm very aware that before the first Iraq conflict, there were some that saw it as a game they got paid to play. I doubt since the first Iraq conflict many have felt that way. And after this, anyone volunteering will certainly realize that such is likely as long as our military is structure as it is now.

I actually wish that anyone that was out of country in military service, be it battle zone or just a 'routine' deployment/patrol, had some protection from foreclosure, default, etc while they were deployed out of country and for a least another 90 days after they get back in country.

I realize there would have to be all sorts of guidelines and restrictions on either suspension of foreclosure or guareenteed payments while out of country, but considering the percentage of taxes this blue collar worker pays, I'm a bit bellerigent about expressing my opinion about how it should be spent to help the country and those that protect it. They deserve a bit extra when deployed, even the ones that take advantage of it. Even if I never served, and sometimes get irritated at what I see as nonsense money, that much I'd like to see.

RogerNC

click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

- Collapse -
Government - Bureaucracy
Mar 29, 2004 9:13PM PST

The Guard has (as best I remember) always gotten the short end of the stick, Roger. They are supposed to be our primary call-up units, but the get don't get much respect from Congress. Our congress-critters, especially the more liberal ones, would prefer to give money to some weird NEA project rather then to the men and women that defend this country.

Having your pay messed up when you are only doing weekend duty (not acceptable though) is one thing, but when your family needs it to survive, that is a different matter altogether.

bureaucracy 3: a system of administration marked by officialism, red tape, and proliferation AND, no money because Congress has typically cut military spending.

U.S. Congressman Tom Davis
Representing the 11th District of Virginia
http://reform.house.gov/GovReform/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=2134