| Subject: Re: newsletter draft |
| From: Scott Mintz <scott.w.mintz@gmail.com> |
| Date: 9/14/10, 16:10 |
| To: Clark Robinson <robinsonchicago@gmail.com> |
| CC: Barrett Brown <barriticus@gmail.com> |
I too was confused by the usage of former and took it to mean the audience of NYT and washpo audience. I wonder if using former in the possessive would help alleviate some confusion.
After thought, I agree also about the firmness as to the what, where, why, and how. I too understand that presenting a strong front is important but maybe out should be reworded to ensure comprehension that while we've accomplished a lot, there is still more to be done. This fits well with our request for participation.
On Sep 14, 2010 10:53 AM, "Clark Robinson" <robinsonchicago@gmail.com> wrote:
I think this is really well stated and self-evidently honest, so I do not have significant revisions to suggest.
I did get hung on up on the term "former audience" in the last sentence of the first long paragraph--at first I thought it referred to 'the first of the pair mentioned previously' but going back I did not find such a pair, so I presumed it refers prospectively to the audience who would be inclined to disregard the less worthy NYT and WaPo pundits if they were more conscious of the alternative pundits, but it confused me to describe a current audience as a former audience. Of course, you make perfectly clear in the next paragraph that a current blog audience now includes a former print audience, but at the moment I got puzzled by the phrase I had not yet read the next paragraph.
In the last long paragraph I am skeptical of the statement that we have a 'firm idea' particularly about some of the 'how' aspects, but I suppose strategically it would be unwise to say otherwise. But certainly we are more firm than formerly if not fully firm. (Esp about implementation issues such as programming, writing the governing board constitution, engaging in activities that have monetary costs or income, if at all.)
Quibbles aside, this is as always nicely written and for me it is useful, in that I will use it as guidance when I write up some thoughts about use of the free website to send to you tomorrow.
Clark
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 7:15 PM, Barrett Brown <barriticus@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Here's the bulk of the actual content of the newsletter, to be followed by the list of our worki...