2010-08-19 20:21:52Corrections needed in published posts


I just added a new post to the already completed thread for BASIC rebuttal for 8 - "Scientists predicted an Ice Age in the 70s". Due to some apparently new magic John recently implemented, the new post is no longer jumping to the top of the threads, answering the question I had put in together with the "typo-alert":

Sorry to be "re-surrecting" an already published post, but I just noticed - while reading the printed out version - that there is one "might" too much in this sentence in the 2nd paragraph:

"At the same time as some scientists were suggesting we might might be facing another..." 

Where should we highlight these types of things? Like I just did with the original thread for the rebuttal or would it be better to have a new thread for things like "Typo-alerts"?

So, it looks as if we'll need a new thread like this one to highlight typos and the like for already published rebuttals. One thread for all, or start a new thread for each original rebuttal thread, or one thread per original author (assuming that s/he and JC are the only ones to update it)?

Any ideas about how best to handle this?

2010-08-19 20:31:38Published posts
John Cook


The original author can edit the published post - just click on Rebuttal List in the left margin and click edit underneath your own rebuttal. So you just need to get the attention of the original author.

Moving the published threads to the bottom is necessary to keep things manageable so the two options are either post a comment to the original thread and hope the original author sees it or start a new thread as you've just done. It mightn't hurt to mention the name of the rebuttal in your Summary header (so in this case, edit this one) - or even mention the author's name if you're having trouble getting their attention. Eg - "ATTN John Russell: correction to 1970s ice age rebuttal".

Or you could just get me to do it. I've fixed the "might might" glitch for now.