• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Shudn't their be sum way too correct what gets wrote? - Yes, there is!

michaeldavid said:
If I communicate effectively, then I'm happy.

So what follows is for @zand, and others.

Each and every day, I quite commonly have blood-glucose readings below 4mmol/l. Not at all uncommonly, I get readings around 2mmol/l.

By and large, however (touch wood), I do not have hypos at all.

It's on account of what I eat, and the way that I eat, that I'm able to tolerate blood-glucose readings that in the past would have brought me to the floor before I might take appropriate action.

But how could my control of my condition possibly appear reasonable when, according to the definition of 'hypoglycaemia' endorsed by this Forum, I am in a semi-constant state of hypoglycaemia?
Click to expand...
Thanks. Yes, I see where you are coming from now. I fully understand that. Thank you
 
Oh Scandi, how could you? I have so much ironing to do today. Perhaps I will just read your little link first.........
 
Every forum has a thread like this from time to time, and you are never going to satisfy both the "Spelling and grammar are sacrosanct" and "Language is a dynamic thing, deal with it" brigades. Not to mention accepting the difficulties of some posters (dyslexia, not first language etc).

I can read txtspk if I have to, but what (sorry, that which) puts me off is when I see 10-20 lines or more of dense text all in one paragraph. That might be OK for Proust or Kerouac, but on here it spoils the clarity.
 
michaeldavid said:
If I communicate effectively, then I'm happy.

So what follows is for @zand, and others.

Each and every day, I quite commonly have blood-glucose readings below 4mmol/l. Not at all uncommonly, I get readings around 2mmol/l.

By and large, however (touch wood), I do not have hypos at all.

It's on account of what I eat, and the way that I eat, that I'm able to tolerate blood-glucose readings that in the past would have brought me to the floor before I might take appropriate action.

But how could my control of my condition possibly appear reasonable when, according to the definition of 'hypoglycaemia' endorsed by this Forum, I am in a semi-constant state of hypoglycaemia?
Click to expand...
Good point -- why not start a new thread with this point?
 
sanguine said:
Every forum has a thread like this from time to time, and you are never going to satisfy both the "Spelling and grammar are sacrosanct" and "Language is a dynamic thing, deal with it" brigades. Not to mention accepting the difficulties of some posters (dyslexia, not first language etc).

I can read txtspk if I have to, but what (sorry, that which) puts me off is when I see 10-20 lines or more of dense text all in one paragraph. That might be OK for Proust or Kerouac, but on here it spoils the clarity.
Click to expand...
Hark at you, with your Kerouac and Proust! Hope this is read in the original language! Personally, I prefer Sartre, if I must read French! Give me Goethe any day. Actually, give me some Henning Mankell or Helene Tursten, in the original language - please, although I shouldn't be admitting to this, when talking about such heavyweight authors - lol!
 
equipoise said:
Good point -- why not start a new thread with this point?
Click to expand...
This is a good point. Definitely off topic but relevant. Definition of hypo should not be set in stone with a certain number, eg, 4. It's the symptoms that count more ( unless to remain compliant with DVLA regs which must be adhered to ). I have been in the 3's and felt fine. Some here have had hypo symptoms at higher levels, 5's or 6's.
As for being precise with grammar, there will always be differences of opinion and as long is a post can be correctly understood, whether or not an apostrophe is in the right place is not important ( just my opinion ).
 
This is the internet - it's easily accessible to anyone! They don't make us take basic intelligence or proficiency tests before we can start using it, so you shouldn't really expect that everyone online is going to be as intelligent as you are.
 
zand said:
Oh Scandi, how could you? I have so much ironing to do today. Perhaps I will just read your little link first.........
Click to expand...
Will you do my ironing too? I my husband does the washing. I then shake everything and hang it from the door. I figure that my body heat will iron out the creases, he, he! The kids have easy iron school uniform which roughly translates as no iron! Bad to the core!
 
Giverny said:
This is the internet - it's easily accessible to anyone! They don't make us take basic intelligence or proficiency tests before we can start using it, so you shouldn't really expect that everyone online is going to be as intelligent as you are.
Click to expand...



lucky for me :)
 
Scandichic said:
Will you do my ironing too? I my husband does the washing. I then shake everything and hang it from the door. I figure that my body heat will iron out the creases, he, he! The kids have easy iron school uniform which roughly translates as no iron! Bad to the core!
Click to expand...
Well. I wooooouuuld, of course I would, but I have to read this very long link now......Sorry....I have got as far as 'collective noun'
 
Scandichic said:
Hark at you, with your Kerouac and Proust! Hope this is read in the original language! Personally, I prefer Sartre, if I must read French! Give me Goethe any day. Actually, give me some Henning Mankell or Helene Tursten, in the original language - please, although I shouldn't be admitting to this, when talking about such heavyweight authors - lol!
Click to expand...

Hahaha - Kerouac in the original American, Proust in English I'm afraid. Though it might as well have been French for all the progress I made with it.

(edited for syntax, doh!)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Giverny said:
This is the internet - it's easily accessible to anyone! They don't make us take basic intelligence or proficiency tests before we can start using it, so you shouldn't really expect that everyone online is going to be as intelligent as you are.
Click to expand...

Innit...wot u said
 
Back
Top