Re: Disappointed by II-Alive editing

[bwells@iag.net (Brian Wells)]

In article <24SEP199620232329@vax2.concordia.ca>,
Mitchell Spector <spec@vax2.concordia.ca> wrote:
>    Yesterday I opened my mail and found a check from SQC and a copy
>of my article as it appeared in the Summer 1996 issue. Although my
>name appears above it, crediting me as the author, I have to say I 
>almost didn't recognize what followed below it! I don't feel my review 
>was "edited", more like it rewritten from scratch using my original 
>writing _only_ as a guideline as where to go.

Ick! Why did they even bother to keep your name on the article? :(

>... I even found the level of grammar to have been 
>downgraded overall, generally as if it were edited in reverse. :P

I too have noticed that the recent issues are lacking in the grammer
department. I know it must be bad when I have to stop every few sentences
and say to myself: "This doesn't look right!" In high school I was the
editor of the school yearbook and found many errors in the submitted
articles. I didn't expect to see any in a commercially published magazine
:/

>Perhaps I now better understand why SQC is ceasing publication 
>of II-Alive in another issue or two. :/ 

True. But II-Alive was _so nice_ when if first appeared on the scene. Take
a look at the first issues.. :: sigh ::


-- 
 |)     \    /                            bwells@iag.net
 |_)RIAN \/\/ELLS                       b.wells5@genie.com
                                    http://www.iag.net/~bwells