New banner ad
October 20, 2009 - 4:03pm
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: Become a Podcaster | Find a Show
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2012 the authors
Syndicate
That is a new meathod of teaching: Eduction = education by induction. Opposite of ededuction = education by deduction.
curse you snert, now that banner ad has turned into the visual equivalent of an ear worm for me... oh the humanity!!!
Love how some of the "progressives" here treat the sponsors that help provide this forum. Especially one like the CCPA.
Spelling flames are lame. Photoshop that yourself Snert?
eta: I'm feeling for the person who approved this who is obviously involved in trying to do good things with no war chest.
Waiter, a sense of humour for the poster above please, there is a big tip in it if you get it to them quickly.
Bagkitty's rule #7 - all internally produced documents contain errors that would not be present had they been produced for an outside customer. This is especially true for media, public relations and printing companies.
Love how some of the "progressives" here treat the sponsors that help provide this forum. Especially one like the CCPA.
Oh for goodness sakes! Would you rather have the spelling error remain?
Before I went to university, I could not spell teacher, now I are one.
I have no sense of humour for those that mock people doing good work. It would have been nice if the error could have been pointed out politely. You don't eat your own but anyways...carry on. :(
I have no sense of humour for those that mock people doing good work. It would have been nice if the error could have been pointed out politely. You don't eat your own but anyways...carry on. :(
Well considering one of their main features is Elizabeth May - I don't think that many people here would consider her viewpoing "one of our own".
Well considering one of their main features is Elizabeth May - I don't think that many people here would consider her viewpoing "one of our own".
Strawperson back at you:
If that makes it easy for you to ignore "Indigenous Language Rights" and "Stephen Lewis on Climate Change" notwithstanding all the other hard work the CCPA does, you're welcome to your own opinion. Not a fan of the CCPA I guess?
Spelling flames are lame.
What's "lame" is trotting out that hoary old shibboleth every time someone points out an important or humorous spelling error.
Do you even know what a "flame" is?
Perhaps I'm not up to your level in flame etiquette101.
What was important or humorous that needed the ol' "FAIL" copycatting?
You're all entitled to your opinion but I find it really cheap. Non-profit orgs operating on pittances deserve our support.
I'm kinda shocked but not really.
What was important or humorous that needed the ol' "FAIL" copycatting?
It was supposed to be the word "education", which makes "Fail" work on so many levels. Well, OK, two levels.
My guess is that rabble put the ad together, not CCPA. But either way, what's a second look before publishing cost these days?
Should not ourselves be one word instead of two separate words?
No.
Ourselves is an emphatic or reflexive pronoun. "Our selves" - an adjective and a noun - means something different, the noun being the plural of "self", meaning "the identity, character, or essential qualities of any person or thing".
Ha! Whoopsie. :D I've passed the message along.
Thanks you MS
Maybe it was supposed to read environmental reduction... God knows it is cluttered enough these days.
Or, perhaps, "environmental seduction"...you know, like what supposedly happens on those long moonlit walks people are always talking about in the personal ads?
I wonder how the discussion would proceed if it was a Conservative Party ad with the same spelling mistake?
Hey, we don't mind the heads up, and it IS kind of a funny mistake since the typo landed in the word "education". :) We'll try and get it fixed ASAP. No offence taken, I'm sure.
I remember a typo in a church bulletin when I worked at a church years ago. There was someone named "Chris" who was participating in the service, and we listed her as "Christ", because when you work at a church, you type "Christ" a lot and it becomes automatic.
We had to redo a hundred bulletins because we didn't catch the mistake until they were all copied. What made it worse is that her last name was something that sounded unflattering next to "Christ". Which made it even more funny (and even more necessary to correct the typo).
I like to think I do progressive and good work here, at least on a good day. My spelling is admittedly weak. I really don't mind if someone teases me about it. Hell, anything to lighten things up a bit around here.
My sister used to be a sign printer at The Bay, many decades ago when you actually had to set the type into a machine. Left the R out of the word Shirts, in ARROW SHIRTS. It was missed until it had been on the floor for a while.
Non-profit orgs operating on pittances deserve our support.
Non-profit organizations need a sense of humour to survive.
Instant collector's item!
My favourite catch was a university promotional pamphlet for a certificate series in Politics and Public Administration. Except that in the copy it was "Pubic Administration". Nice work if you can get it. It was also a great illustration of why spell checkers are your unreliable friend, what with "pubic" being a perfectly legit word, and spelled correctly.
Oh damn. I'm taking that program! Ha!
The banner's all good now, BTW.
OK, now we've got that fixed, time for some equal-opportunity mockery:
I still maintain it is all covered by my rule #7.
For starters I actually read the banner.
OK, now we've got that fixed, time for some equal-opportunity mockery:
I'm glad nobody else will be juging him. It sounds quite painful, especially if that's a juging wound right below the words.
Although "Divided We Stand, United We Fall" is a little ambiguous.
Not only ambiguous, but paradoxical.
And the explanation (see p. 9 ff.) doesn't really help much.
Sorry all, I was having a bad day.
RP... everyone is entitled to one. Of course if it becomes a lifestyle choice we are going to get all jugemental and tie you down and tattoo you.
why is it blue?
Why is what blue? The ad?
Clearly, it's deliberately paradoxical--or, more accurately, it's a deliberate inversion of an old maxim. The explanation is not the clearest, but I understand what Sandberg is saying: that the fight for adequate environmental education is through diversity, not some mythic "grand" narrative from the mouth of white capitalist patriarchy.
Snert -- you win a free copy of the issue for catching the mistake first. If you send me a private message with your address, I'll send you a copy in the mail.
Thanks all for a hilarious thread -- we had a great laugh here at the CCPA. We're confident you'll enjoy the thought-provoking, engaging content that Our Schools / Our Selves has been providing since 1988.
Yep, it is very hard on the eyes, with the green font colouring, of the same tonal quality, and it makes me think of the "hockeytown" Canada contest, KD, or the Conservative Party
Blue and green being used together requires that the one has to be a few shades different in tone, than what the other one is. They are at war with one another, and indeed make one look away. And I would bet that is part of the reason why the typo was not noticed.
And the blue looks to be bleeding into the white font, but I think that is a problem with the choice of font styles, not the blue. A black frame if your are using a sans serif, on such a strong background, may stop the opitical illusion of bleeding blue into the white.
But that still leaves you with having too strong of a green font colour, if you leave the background that strong of blue.