hidashara: (Default)
Charlotte Ashley ([personal profile] hidashara) wrote2007-02-27 12:02 pm

(no subject)

For those of you who missed the locked post, this journal is in the process of being locked. You must be on my friends-list in order to read the bulk of it. :)

As with anyone, feel free to just add me (or email me to remind me!) if you want access.

Lots of back-locking to do still, though. :/

Boo

[identity profile] pwththth.livejournal.com 2007-02-27 06:03 pm (UTC)(link)
Well, I enjoy reading your rants. Keep the old Yasuki on your friends list?

Re: Boo

[identity profile] shara.livejournal.com 2007-02-27 06:08 pm (UTC)(link)
I am not removing anyone from friends - actually, I am adding people. :) I like to think I don't have anything to hide, I just want to avoid random anonymous stop-ins from reading and leaping to conclusions.

Re: Boo

[identity profile] jokermage.livejournal.com 2007-03-01 12:55 am (UTC)(link)
By the way, thanks for adding me.

Non-LJ'ers?

(Anonymous) 2007-02-28 12:12 am (UTC)(link)
Hey Charlotte,

Just curious if LJ has a way to unlock posts for non-LJ users. I've enjoyed reading your posts, but am still resolved not to blog/LJ...

Chris/DJ Daimon

Re: Non-LJ'ers?

[identity profile] shara.livejournal.com 2007-02-28 01:29 am (UTC)(link)
Unfortunately there's no way for non-LJers to see a locked post. But you could always start an LJ just to read, you know. You don't have to *post* anything. :)

Just spam me... I can take it.

(Anonymous) 2007-02-28 02:39 pm (UTC)(link)
Ugh... Any chance you could just e-mail me your posts? :)

Chris

Re: Just spam me... I can take it.

[identity profile] shara.livejournal.com 2007-02-28 02:40 pm (UTC)(link)
Dude, that would be like spam....

Re: Just spam me... I can take it.

(Anonymous) 2007-03-02 12:53 am (UTC)(link)
No it wouldn't - spam is unrequested. :)

Unless you start sending me somewhat pornographic e-mails with random words thrown in to defeat spam filters.

Remember the good old days of e-mail updates? You know, like the ones I still do once in a while? :) (not sure if you're actually on my updates list - I don't think so, though, so you might not be getting them...)

Chris

(Anonymous) 2007-05-09 02:44 am (UTC)(link)
You can win an argument on any topic, but can't fucking spell romanticism correctly?

[identity profile] shara.livejournal.com 2007-05-09 03:16 am (UTC)(link)
Absolutely. Epics are written about the state of my spelling. :/ My defense is that Robertson Davies & Gabriel Garcia Marquez were also abyssal spellers - I have seen the proofs.

In other news - er, that quote is meant to be ironic, cheeky or self-depreciating.

(Anonymous) 2007-05-11 11:38 pm (UTC)(link)
That's self-deprecating, and before you tell me they're "both acceptable", the two come from different IE roots (http://www.bartleby.com/61/IEroots.html), and their interchangeability is nothing more than an accepted error:

ENTRY: per-5
DEFINITION: To traffic in, sell (< “to hand over,” “distribute”). A verbal root belonging to the group of per1. Base of two distinct extended roots.
I. Root form *pret-. 1. interpret, from Latin compound inter-pres (stem inter-pret-), go-between, negotiator (inter-, between; see en). 2. Suffixed form *pret-yo-. praise, precious, price; appraise, appreciate, depreciate, from Latin pretium, price.

ENTRY: prek-
DEFINITION: To ask, entreat. Oldest form *pre-, becoming *prek- in centum languages.1. Basic form *prek-. pray, prayer1, precarious; deprecate, imprecate, prie-dieu, from *prex, prayer (attested only in the plural precs), with Latin denominative precr, to entreat, pray. 2. Suffixed zero-grade form *pk-sk- becoming *pork-sk-, contracted to *posk- in suffixed form *posk-to-, contracted to *posto-. postulate; expostulate, from Latin postulre, to ask, request. (Pokorny 4. per- 821.)

I don't know what those two authors prove, anyway. What I've seen of their work wasn't interesting at all. You're not wrong however. And you're cute, so you could misspell every other word and it wouldn't matter, ultimately.

[identity profile] shara.livejournal.com 2007-05-12 02:06 am (UTC)(link)
I don't know what those two authors prove, anyway. What I've seen of their work wasn't interesting at all. You're not wrong however. And you're cute, so you could misspell every other word and it wouldn't matter, ultimately.

How utterly depressing.

I hope that they prove that spelling is not necessarily a pre-requisite to literacy - I am a notoriously abysmal speller (no, both are not "acceptable" - one is correct and I hope to remember which is which) but even if I were to aspire to a "lettered" status (which I don't), I could always enlist an editor. :)

(Anonymous) 2007-05-12 05:01 am (UTC)(link)
I hope that they prove that spelling is not necessarily a pre-requisite to literacy

Sure. But I expect of authors who are believed to be great or relevant - and I deny this in the case of both - a higher standard. For example, the original manuscript of Faust, housed in the Goethe-Archiv at Weimar, contains something like less than ten mistakes total; I saw only a few pages on display, but those few pages were impeccable, a masterpiece of tact. I don't expect people to be Goethe, of course, and I myself make more mistakes than correct strokes of the pen. Just saying....proofread, proofread, proofread!

[identity profile] shara.livejournal.com 2007-05-12 12:23 pm (UTC)(link)
proofread, proofread, proofread!

*salutes*

Aye aye, capt'n.... I'll do what I can, but while blogging, I can only promise so much. ;)

Submitted for your approval... a man, with a journal...

[identity profile] cyberwarlock.livejournal.com 2008-04-08 07:30 pm (UTC)(link)
Hi.

Was just looking through people with similar interests and stumbled across your page. I noticed you are from Deep River and now live in Toronto. I grew up in Renfrew and spent a year of High School in Pembroke as well, and now live in Mississauga. Anyway, you seemed an interesting sort so I thought I would petition you for entry to your literary world.

Thanks. :)