Thursday, December 20, 2012

The premise is … I’m getting even madder

I was reading this IBM Redbook today, and it didn’t make a good first impression:


I really love IBM Redbooks, but not at all the way that this one starts off. Integrating cloud systems with on-premise systems? You don’t say!

The Redbook makes lots of incorrect statements, such as this gem (one of many) on page 5:

Monitor and manage resources in a standardized way across on-premise and off-premise resources.

Then today there was this article in Climate Spectator concerning the stand taken by  Australian senator John Madigan:

In his concern for the potential health effects of wind turbines, Madigan has put before parliament a series of amendments to the Renewable Energy Act. These would suspend the accreditation of a wind farm to create renewable energy certificates if it creates “excessive noise”. He defines that to be when the level of noise that is attributable to the wind farm exceeds background noise by 10 dB(A) or more when measured within 30 metres of a household or business premise.

Within 30 metres of a household or business premise, really? (I wasn’t aware that a premise can be location-based, were you?)

What have these two got in common? Surely you already realize what I’m getting at? If not, take a peek at this post of mine back in April 2010 and you’ll see what I’m getting at.

Unfortunately this particular mangling of a beautifully bizarre language goes on every day like the above two examples. We see it a lot in Australia due to the roll-out of our National Broadband Network and use of the term whose acronym is FTTP

So I must trudge wearily on, trying to make sure that the final “s” is used wherever necessary.

I know, I know, I should do something better with my time, but it gets under my skin and irritates me intensely, so I scratch and scratch and therefore need to do something about it.

So my campaign struggles on -- based on the premise that if I continue to highlight this sad matter then at least a few people might see the error of their ways.

1 comment: