| |
Ponderings by one not afraid to look deeper, to investigate, to ask boldly.
Some questions in life are better left unanswered ... or are they?
|
|
Copyright ©2001-2005 by Karla Wollin Boyer
World Rights Reserved
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 If it's dangerous to ask disturbing questions, is it also dangerous to offer unsettling answers? Or is it more dangerous to keep both to oneself?
Is there some law that says an atheist can't be United States President? How would he or she end speeches to Americans? Can only God bless America? And what about the deity references on our money?
Why does Daylight Savings Time even exist? We're never going to fool Mother Nature!
When is someone going to teach teachers how to teach? Our high schools are graduating illiterate students who can't make their way well in the world because they don't know how to communicate effectively. Can this even be fixed?
What could be more intrusive than telemarketing calls? Why is this daily personal invasion still legal?
Why ask why if asking how produces the more useful response?
Is it wise to follow logic when experience leads us elsewhere?
Why do so many reporters mix up "breath" with "breathe" and "past" with "passed" and "lose" with "loose"? Do they not know that good reporting requires good spelling?
Why would a professional online forum aimed at benefiting language artists prohibit corrections to language errors by fellow well-meaning participants? I know of just such a place, where blatant misspellings and grossly improper grammar are both acceptable and implicitly encouraged to continue shamelessly for the sake of preserving fragile egos. Must we tolerate incompetence in order to protect weak personalities?
Can we be respectfully critical without inviting disrespectful criticism in return?
Now that the name change to National Court Reporters Association has reached up and bitten us "write" where it hurts, are we ready to revert the name of our group to National Shorthand Reporters Association?
Why does NCRA say the National Speed Contest Champion received a gold medal for the win when the award is a trophy, no medal?
How can it be correct to grade by percentage in a test or contest where a one-word error can turn into three or four realtime misstrokes and be counted as so many errors, and missing or wrong periods, commas, QA symbols, and question marks are added up as well but not included in the original word count to arrive at a percentage formula? It's possible to get more than 100 percent wrong!
If I make six errors in an INTERSTENO competition and receive four penalty points for each wrong word, resulting in 24 penalty points for the six errors, how can it be correct to cite me with 24 errors? What is an error, anyway?
How can NCRA continue approving realtime theories so cumbersome to write that most writers of them can't pass basic realtime certification exams? And how can schools maintain coveted NCRA approval when they graduate students misled to believe they are writing 225wpm after years of training but who then take several more years to pass the 225 RPR?
After years of witnessing National Speed Contest medalists struggling onstage to slide award medals over their heads for richly deserved adornment, why does NCRA continue to present the medalists with ribbons much too short to accommodate women with little heads and big hair, men with big heads and little hair, and, in Karla's case, someone with a big head AND big hair? Please, how about just a few more inches on that precious ribbon!
Since we know that experienced reporters can develop writing speed well beyond 225 wpm just from taking their jobs seriously and since we also know that not all writers who succeed on the RMR exam are automatically writing 280 wpm, how does anyone possessing a fair amount of math sense accept the premise that an experienced reporter convincingly gained 55 words per minute of speed skill while reporting a difficult two-week trial just for having passed the RMR following that trial experience? Honestly! Does anyone out there view that as an unfortunately naive premise? Shouldn't everyone realize that likely ten words per minute of skill is the actual solid gain we are witnessing? And a commendable gain that is! Isn't the truth of the progress remarkable enough without adding hyperbole?
What does it take to give sight to the eyes of the blind being led by the blind down a blind alley?
Since so far we have had four National Realtime Contest Champions, writing four different realtime theories, how can it today be said that only one realtime theory has won the National Realtime Contest? More than one realtime theory has also won the National Speed Contest!
Since it is easily proven that a speed champion has repeatedly very accurately written 280 wpm averaging 7-9 strokes per second, why would someone conveniently and publicly choose not to believe it? It has to be a self-serving denial of uncomfortable facts.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Copyright ©2001-2005 by Karla Wollin Boyer
World Rights Reserved
Site Content Quality Specialist:
Karla Wollin Boyer, BS, RDR, CRR, SCC, RCQ, RCC
National and World Shorthand Speed Champion
National Shorthand Realtime Champion
Cinnamon Rose Productions
Special thanks to Charles A. Boyer for brilliant brainstorming and idea stimulation.
Please do not quote anywhere anything contained on this Web page. Thank you.
|
|
We're getting along swimmingly ... don't you think?
|
|
|
