posted on May 9, 2001 05:58:03 PM new
Ebay has made a minor change in the EOA notices. Previously, when an auction ended with no bidding, the EOA notice would say, "Sorry, this auction has ended without any bidders". Now, it says "Sorry, this auction has ended without any winner bidders".
>
>
English teachers will be in a tizzy, but for me it's fine. In my auctions I want only winner bidders, I have no use for loser bidders!
posted on May 9, 2001 06:03:50 PM new
Kinda like last month when my NPB's stated, congradulations on winning the auction. I guess all the site improvements didn't include spell check.
posted on May 9, 2001 06:17:51 PM new
Unfortunately, Ebay staff often seem to be poorly educated, especially when it comes to grammar. This deosn't exactly inspire confidence.
posted on May 9, 2001 07:03:55 PM new
In the site map, you can "leave feedback ON a member"
Umm, "about" a member"?
"concerning" a member?
"regarding" a member?
sure... but "ON" a member? NOT!
Hey, programmers are expected to program, not to know English!!
posted on May 10, 2001 05:18:15 AM new
Posters on this board commenting on Ebay's grammar and spelling? They might just want to take a second look at some of their own posts.
posted on May 10, 2001 07:09:45 AM new
If the posters here were public representatives of a large, public company that was trying to make money and keep up a significant stock valuation, I'd expect to see professional, spell-checked posts from them.
However, we aren't, so its clear that ebay should be held to a higher standard of accountability.
There is NO excuse for misspelled documents to come from a "real" company in this day and age. Grammar is a little harder to get "right", but the "winner bidders" is the kind of mistake that should also never have happened, and/or been fixed quickly.
posted on May 10, 2001 09:17:49 AM new
Fortunately, most of us here aren't the "spelling snob" that you appear to be, and can see through any roughness in posts to the contributions contained thereof.
You want professional? Feel free to go and hire one, and revel in their precise grammar and finely-tuned sentences.
For the "cost" (some time), AW is a treasure-trove of help and support (and even fun!)
[ edited by captainkirk on May 10, 2001 09:40 AM ]
posted on May 10, 2001 09:40:10 AM new
Captain Kirk,
Gee, does holding myself to a higher standard make ME a spelling snob? It's easy to hold oneself to a low standard, you can usually meet it. If you're posting in a public forum, you should ATTEMPT to do so with attention to grammar and spelling. If you're posting an auction, even greater care should be given. Poor spelling and grammar is not necessarily an indication of ignorance but possibly just an apathetic attitude. I will never buy from a seller who is careless in spelling and grammar. I transpose that attitude to what the package will look like if and when it arrives. But you're right on one count- eBay has NO excuse!!!
[ edited by beowolf on May 10, 2001 09:41 AM ]
You are welcome to hold yourself to ANY standard you so choose. Go for it, high or low, makes no difference to me.
Damariscotta was criticising the grammar and spelling of the posters here, who are UNPAID contributors who are glad to show up and help others, who participate in discussions that are relevant and useful to others, etc. To be honest, I think that is incredibly rude on their part. Professional discussion is a mere payment away on their part, if that is what they want - $75 per hour or so should just about cover it.
We weren't talking about the grammar of SELLERS. Again, sellers are in business, trying to make money, so yes, they should make a good attempt to be professional. Ads should be spell checked at the very least.
As far as posting here goes, I'm OK with people's contributions in whatever form. Some people truly can't spell any better, and/or don't want to take the time and trouble to do spell checking, given that they aren't getting paid for this.
But if YOU are dissatified with the level of grammar and spelling here, by all means, take whatever actions you feel appropriate. Its just not on my list of things to do, i've got more important worries.
posted on May 10, 2001 10:05:18 AM new
The last thing I want to do is take sides here, but I'm a huge proponent of using the language correctly. I think we often represent ourselves by the way we write. It's different when posting on a bulletin board, where sometimes you're more concerned with making a point than writing a published novel. Typos happen, and participles dangle.
But when it comes to boilerplate messages sent to hundreds of thousands of people every day, I think it's important to proofread them for spelling and grammar errors. The same goes for high-profile Web pages.
I've noticed that many auction site Web page authors seem to have chucked the grammar and spelling books after 8th grade. My favorite is this one:
Click here when your ready to list you're auction.
AAARGH!!!
On the other hand, I'm a writer, so maybe it's a bigger issue to me than it is to others. To each her own.
Edited to fix a hilarious typo.
[ edited by marble on May 10, 2001 10:06 AM ]
posted on May 10, 2001 11:21:54 AM new
Hmmm I wonder, following beowolf's logic, if a seller has no spelling or grammar errors, that could be a sign of a snob, a perfectionist or an intolerable being, and maybe I wouldn't bother buyer from such a person in fear of being held to their standards or else???
To paraphrase a saying in the bible, "Do not judge, lest you want to be judged."
posted on May 10, 2001 11:39:30 AM new
"And picking on Ebay's spelling and grammar is an example of that helpfulness? "
Actually, I lump that into the "fun" category that I also mentioned.
But, indirectly, it WAS helpful, since the discussion, as it usually does here, discussed this issue in some depth, and a clear, HELPFUL message came out: if you are in business, you SHOULD be careful about such errors.
So, yes, in the grand scheme of things, it WAS, ultimately, helpful!
"No, Damariscotta was simply amused that some posters were being rather petty about Ebay's errors when their own posts were not any better"
Well, again, you seem to have completely missed the point. Ebay's errors are the errors of a BUSINESS in their PUBLIC presentation, errors made by posters here are not remotely in the same category, and hence need not follow the same standard - unless you are willing to pay for MY time to run spell check as I post (I can assure you it would be a fairly large sum of money...). If you are, kindly send me your CC# for me to begin charging.
Besides, you have NOT shown that the specific people criticizing ebay, do, in fact, have equally poor writing abilities in THEIR business publications, or even, for that matter, their posts here (not that the latter are of comparable importance, as discussed above).
Nice try, but it still comes out as being rather derogratory to the people here - unfairly in my own opinion. But if you like to maintain an elitist attitude, go for it.
Net: comparing the standard that ebay should be adhering to in their business publications to the standard of a chat board is wrong, no matter how you try to justify it.
posted on May 10, 2001 11:58:27 AM new
One would have to assume that if ebay could somehow be held to a "higher level of accountability" that we would all have to leave, swastikas and all!
posted on May 10, 2001 12:46:46 PM new
"One would have to assume that if ebay could somehow be held to a "higher level of accountability" that we would all have to leave, swastikas and all!"
Interesting comment.
Its quite easy to hold ebay to a higher level of accountability for being professional, since they charge for the services they provide (and the notices they send out), whereas people here, and the posts that are made, are unpaid volunteers.
How the swastikas figure into this, only you can explain. I'll have to read your explanation (if any is forthcoming) tomorrow, as my day here is done...
[ edited by captainkirk on May 10, 2001 01:18 PM ]
posted on May 10, 2001 01:54:21 PM new
Actually, "this auction has ended without any winner bidders" makes sense if they are going to also use it with reserve auction notices that didn't have the reserve met.
Could'a got a lot of bids with no winner.
Um, but in that case it should say "without any winner bidder" (singular, since you can only have one winner)...
posted on May 10, 2001 02:04:02 PM new
Of course I have no idea what posters here do in their "business" - I can only know them from their posts, and it was (and still is) amusing to me that two of the posts critical of Ebay's spelling and grammar contain mistakes. And as my comment was concerned only with that situation, I did not (and will not) point out the specific posts/errors.
And since posting here makes one "an unpaid volunteer" granting dispensation from any criticism, I am afraid that you will have to grant the same to me.
Have a pleasant evening.
"Besides, you have NOT shown that the specific people criticizing ebay, do, in fact, have equally poor writing abilities in THEIR business publications, or even, for that matter, their posts here (not that the latter are of comparable importance, as discussed above). "
posted on May 10, 2001 03:18:56 PM new
As ebaY remains one of the hottest properties on the web and their EOA notices are one of their most important standard communications, and are sent in the vicinity of a million times a day, I think it is reasonable to expect a higher level of grammatical precision than what can be expected from miscellaneous chat board postings. ebaY should be ashamed of the error; It shows a slipshod approach to their core business. However, as they hold such a strong monopoly position, it doesn't matter much.
As a silly little grammatical quible, I keep keep noticing how few posters here distinguish between "their", "there", and "they're".
posted on May 10, 2001 03:42:13 PM new
Maybe they all went to the same school - eBay University? E.U. (like you just stepped in something Icky) to the uninitiated. As a side note, Butterfields used to be considered one of the premier real world auctions; now owned by eBay. In the May issue of The Magazine Antiques a glossy, full page ad from Butterfields featuring a $45,000 piano they recently sold. They are currently, they say, accepting property for their September 2001 Furniture and Decoartive Arts auction. No joke.
posted on May 10, 2001 03:48:53 PM new
I admit to occasionally stumbling on "it's" and "its," but I'm really trying hard to improve. Honest. I'll do better next semester ...
posted on May 10, 2001 08:36:12 PM new
I am a bit of a spelling and grammatical snob, yet I find it most interesting the person who finds some posters were being rather petty about Ebay's errors when their own posts were not any better has a huge number of incorrect usages of punctuation in their post.
I certainly think the incorrect usage of punctuation and grammar along with poor spelling is unfortunate in an auction or business environment. But I understand the message boards are a more relaxed environment.
posted on May 10, 2001 08:45:03 PM new
captainkirk: I was reading thru this thread on funny grammar, and then the talk turned to holding ebay to a "higher standard of acountablility" and then I started day dreaming...and thinking how France and Germany seem to be the only ones who can. Try this thread for the swastika part.http://www.auctionwatch.com/mesg/read.html?num=2&thread=368333 Didn't mean to change the subject and spoil your bash...sorry!
posted on May 11, 2001 05:16:06 AM new
Since "unpaid volunteers" are protected from criticism, you need to overlook any of my errors (and you don't have to bother correcting the first sentence of your post).
posted on May 10, 2001 08:36:12 PM new
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am a bit of a spelling and grammatical snob,
You didn't "spoil my bash", I just didn't see where you were coming from on the swastika stuff.
Damariscotta:
That's right, I fully intend to overlook all your spelling and grammar mistakes - I'm very consistent that way.
On the other hand, since the purpose of this board is discussion and debate, and since you CHOSE to post here (and in a rude way in my opinion), your posts are "fair game" in terms of analyzing their fallacies and attitude.
Unless something new comes up, I'll close by repeating my central thesis: writings from a for-profit business, like ebay, should be held to the standard of being professional, and are subject to criticism when they are not.
Conversely, writings from posters here should not be held to that same standard, for what (I thought) were obvious reasons (but apparently not to you).
You're entitled to your own (minority) opinion, of course.
