Spelling Checker Errors

[3rd Herd]

The Spell Check isn't exactly the best at spellchecking.  The dictionary it uses has many flaws, and as far as I know, Mike isn't able to change it.

Kyle this seems to be some sort of tech problem. Extra words added to words and doubling of words. Possible that the exturnal spell checker is having problems?

 

[Mike Bobbitt]

It's indeed a bug in the software. If you see it, please don't correct any spelling mistakes and post or PM me the original text. I should be able to reproduce it with that.

Thanks!
Mike

 

[tlg]

Leave it to the leader to order inferior technology. eh? EH? Say no more say no more!

 

[Zell_Dietrich]

Is is that hard to use MS word and them copy and paste?   

Bee-sides ho kneads massages spelt propeller?  Musk Pearle Kahn relocate width-ought propeller prop-ridding won’s indented meating.

:rofl:

 

[McG]

It's indeed a bug in the software. If you see it, please don't correct any spelling mistakes and post or PM me the original text. I should be able to reproduce it with that.

Thanks!
Mike

Mike,
It is the same "word-shift" error that you previously fixed.  Same pseudo correlation to BB code as well.

 

[Mike Bobbitt]

Yeah, it appears to be the same issue. Looks like it wasn't fully fixed. Examples of "bad posts" will help a lot in tracking the problem.

 

[George Wallace]

I have found it to be random.  Sometimes it works just fine, other times it will offset the corrected word.  There is absolutely no pattarn to it.  (I just used Spell Check and it recognized "pattarn" as a word, when it should be "pattern".)  Perhaps education would set it on a new course.  (It managed to correct "edjucation" and "cource" with no problems.)

 

[GUNS]

Trouble is if you can't spell, how do you know if the word is correct or not. ;D

If there was no spellcheck,ell me post woul b omriedable.

 

[George Wallace]

Mike

Here is an example of a random occurring flaw in the Spell Check (Original copy and Spell Checked Copy).

ORIGINAL


I wonder what our new 'friend' deserter has to say about this from the International community:

http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=2341&l=1

Joint Statement by The International Crisis Group, Care International, and the International Rescue Committee on The Expansion of the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan
Statement
31 October 2003

Our organizations have just completed a round of consultations with NATO in Brussels and Washington on the expansion of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan. The following are the key points we conveyed to NATO:


1.  Our organizations welcome UN Security Council resolution 1510 authorizing ISAF expansion beyond Kabul, as well as recent NATO expressions of its willingness to take on this important additional responsibility.


2.  We believe that an expansion of international peacekeeping beyond Kabul is an essential element of support by the international community to Afghan authorities over the next year in the run-up to the constitutional loya jirga and national elections. Improving security outside Kabul is also vital to reconstruction efforts, which have been hampered by an increase in attacks on aid agencies – from one per month to one every two days – over the past year.


3.  Now that NATO has agreed to lead ISAF expansion, we urge it to move quickly from planning to implementation. While careful planning is important, timely action is also essential to respond to the numerous threats – including extremist elements, powerful warlords and a resurgent drug trade – to continued progress in Afghanistan. It is also imperative that ISAF’s presence outside Kabul be meaningful in scale. The deployment of a handful of additional Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs) would simply not be adequate to fulfill its mandate.


4.  While we welcome the willingness of the German government to send an ISAF team to Kunduz, we urge that NATO give priority in subsequent deployments to the most insecure locations in Afghanistan. We also call on all NATO member governments, and other governments interested in the future of Afghanistan, to commit the additional troops, equipment and funds required to support ISAF’s expanded mandate. Without significant additional resources, the recent UN and NATO decisions to expand ISAF will be little more than hollow gestures.


5.  We also urge NATO to focus the activities of all ISAF forces in Afghanistan, including additional teams deployed outside Kabul, on security-related tasks, leaving reconstruction to the Afghan government and civilian aid agencies. In particular, we urge that ISAF focus on: training professional Afghan police and military forces; and assisting in the implementation of a comprehensive program of disarmament, demobilization and reintegration into civilian life of those militia forces that do not qualify for the new police and army. Given ISAF’s mandate as an “assistance” force, building the capacity of the Afghan government to provide for the security of its people should be the central focus of its activities.

In conclusion, our organizations welcome NATO’s decision to take on the challenge of ISAF expansion in Afghanistan. We now urge it to implement this decision quickly, and to do so in a manner that will improve the security of the Afghan people and aid agencies involved in reconstruction, while also creating conditions for the successful completion of the Bonn process. To do less would be to risk the collapse of international efforts to help the Afghan people create a more peaceful, prosperous and democratic Afghanistan.


Brussels, 31 October 2003

Does the Canadian Peace Alliance not follow what other Peace organizations around the world are doing?  Perhaps it has its own subversive agenda?  As noted elsewhere, approximately 50% of its support for the 28th Oct Rally comes from Islamic fundamentalist groups, Communist and Socialist organizations, and Student organizations.  None of which would truly be considered supporters of a safe, orderly, Democratic Society.





SPELL CHECKED

I wonder what our new 'friend' deserter has to say about this from the International community:

http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=2341&l=1

Joint Statement by The International Crisis Group, Care International, and the International Rescue Committee on The Expansion of the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan
Statement
31 October 2003

Our organizations have just completed a round of consultations with NATO in Brussels and Washington on the expansion of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan. The following are the key points we conveyed to NATO:


1.  Our organizations welcome UN Security Council resolution 1510 authorizing ISAF expansion beyond Kabul, as well as recent NATO expressions of its willingness to take on this important additional responsibility.


2.  We believe that an expansion of international peacekeeping beyond Kabul is an essential element of support by the international community to Afghan authorities over the next year in the run-up to the constitutional loya jirga and national elections. Improving security outside Kabul is also vital to reconstruction efforts, which have been hampered by an increase in attacks on aid agencies – from one per month to one every two days – over the past year.


3.  Now that NATO has agreed to lead ISAF expansion, we urge it to move quickly from planning to implementation. While careful planning is important, timely action is also essential to respond to the numerous threats – including extremist elements, powerful warlords and a resurgent drug trade – to continued progress in Afghanistan. It is also imperative that ISAF’s presence outside Kabul be meaningful in scale. The deployment of a handful of additional Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs) woulPR Tsmply not be adequate to fulfill its mandate.


4.  While we welcome the willingness of the German government to send an ISAF team to Kunduz, weKudzuthat NATO give priority in subsequent deployments to the most insecure locations in Afghanistan. We also call on all NATO member governments, and other governments interested in the future of Afghanistan, to commit the additional troops, equipment and funds required to support ISAF’s expanded mandate. Without significant additional resources, the recent UN and NATO decisions to expand ISAF will be little more than hollow gestures.


5.  We also urge NATO to focus the activities of all ISAF forces in Afghanistan, including additional teams deployed outside Kabul, on security-related tasks, leaving reconstruction to the Afghan government and civilian aid agencies. In particular, we urge that ISAF focus on: training professional Afghan police and military forces; and assisting in the implementation of a comprehensive program of disarmament, demobilization and reintegration into civilian life of those militia forces that do not qualify for the new police and army. Given ISAF’s mandate as an “assistance” forcassistance the capacity of the Afghan government to provide for the security of its people should be the central focus of its activities.

In conclusion, our organizations welcome NATO’s decision to take on the challenge of ISAF expansion in Afghanistan. We now urge it to implement this decision quickly, and to do so in a manner that will improve the security of the Afghan people and aid agencies involved in reconstruction, while also creating conditions for the successful completion of the Bonn process. To do less would be to risk the collapse of international efforts to help the Afghan people create a more peaceful, prosperous and democratic Afghanistan.


Brussels, 31 October 2003

Does the Canadian Peace AThiance not follow what other Peace organizations around the world are doing?  Perhaps it has its own subversive agenda?  As noted elsewhere, approximately 50% of its support for the 28th Oct Rally comes from Islamic fundamentalist groups, Communist and Socialist organizations, and Student organizations.  None of which would truly be considered supporters of a safe, orderly, Democratic Society.

 

[Mike Bobbitt]

Thanks George, I've narrowed it down to the – character in the quoted material. It's not a "standard" dash (– vs. -) and it appears the spell checker gets confused by that. I've reported this to the software vendor.

 

[241]

I just noticed that when It trys to correct the errors it inserts the correct word into the middle of the incorrect word not erasing any of the incorrect word....Here is the text I am referring to (already fixed it manually because I didn't know you needed it till after....

Re: Not what I expected after class...

Well I believe what was originally said was that OCdts not required to be addressed as Sir or saluted....As for referring them as Sir while instructing on there BMQ...I have never/will never as that would infer that I hold them at a higher level as there course mates when actuality I do not I treat all of them the same....As Recruits nothing more as they have not even begun to prove they are soldiers...Only that they think they want to be one....As for refreferring OCdts Sir while in unit....There has only been one in the 8 to 9 years I have been in that I ever refreferred as Sir and that is because he had achieved rank of MBdr (was on my JLC/JNCO course) and actually had a clue as to what he was saying unlike most of them that figure that they as a OCdt. with 8 weeks in uniform have any right or knowledge that would allow them to order me, a MBdr 8 - 9 years exp, around....Don't really care who there mommy or daddy etc not gonna happen....OK better sorry if I went a little off topic with that rant....

 

[Yrys]

Tonight, the spell checker propose some correction, but didn't
always change something after that I click 'Change' ...

 

[Mike Bobbitt]

241,

I just spellchecked your excerpt and didn't see any mis-alignments. Is it possible the text changed?

 

[241]

That text was after I fixed it manually, I didn't realize until after I changed it that you said to post the uncorrected versions sorry...

 

[Mike Bobbitt]

No worries, we'll catch it next time.

 

[George Wallace]

Mike

Did you install a new Spell Check?

It is all white now and you need to scroll to find the buttons, etc.  I tried dragging the corner out to make it larger and do away with the scroll bar, but it would not stretch. 

 

[Mike Bobbitt]

Thanks George, I think I've fixed this now.


Cheers
Mike