BG> Take RTL for example (please!), he professes to be a programmer,
BG> yet his spelling is so atrocious, that I can't imagine any of his
BG> programs ever compiling or running correctly.

RS> Very simple really, what affects good spelling has
RS> SFA to do with what affects being a good programmer,
RS> or getting programs to compile or run.

RS> And they dont have the bizarre variation you get with english,

BG> Won't wash, Rod.

RS> Fraid so.

BG> I'm not talking about incorrect tense, nor even specifically grammar
BG> (although Christ knows that's bad enough these days), but misspelling
BG> the root word, due to either laziness, or a simple inability to learn
BG> by rote, and if it's the latter, they're fucked as programmers.

RS> Still mangling the story completely.

BG> Nope, approaching it a different POV perhaps, but not mangling it.

Fraid so, you clearly know bugger all about whats involved with programming.

RS> The problem with most english spelling is the weird exception stuff,
RS> the surprisingly complex rules on when you use 'ie' and when you use
RS> 'ei', the weird variation in the spelling as you pluralise the word,

BG> Sure, but that's more or less common to all languages (gender
BG> specific stuff is even worse), but

And programming has nothing like that at all. So if you have a problem
with that stuff, and many people who dont spell very well do, it says
SFA about whether you will be able to program effectively or not.

BG> it's not what I'm really talking about.

Pity that its whats involved in lousy spelling tho, and not programming.

RS> the variety where you get an 'sc' in obscene but not in obscession.

BG> ROFL!  Oh Christ, I have tears running down my face.  That's the
BG> funniest line I've ever seen you use.  I bet you even programmed
BG> your OLX spelling checker to accept "obscession" too.  |-)

BG> Composed again, and yeah, "census" and
"consensus" are another weird
BG> pair. Nobody ever suggested that learning English spelling was easy,

And the point is that people who have a problem with it, or dont
give a stuff about it, and so dont have perfect spelling has sweet
fuck all to do with whether they can be effective programmers or not.

BG> but at least Europeans have fewer difficulties than
BG> Asian languages which have no equivalent alphabet.

Which still has sweet fuck all to do with what we were actually
discussing, whether someone who has a problem with spelling will
find that problem any limitation on their programming capabilitys.

BG> Even cyrillic Russian and Arabic must be difficult.

Russian is no problem at all spelling wise, its completely phonetic.

BG> Says nothing useful about correct spelling in general though.

RS> Pity you were talking about programming and whether lousy english
RS> spelling says a damned thing about effectiveness as a programmer.

BG> I know, but I have this nasty habit of digressing from
BG> continually discussing the same topic ad infinitum once
BG> our respective points have been made.

Pity the digression is utterly irrelevant to the original discussion.

RS> Your original said 'I cant imagine', the explanation is obvious.

BG> Yeah, I understand what you're saying, and agree with
BG> a large part of it, but still don't fully agree that
BG> a poor speller can be a great programmer.

Its utterly irrelevant basically. There
is no relationship between them at all.

BG> The spelling was merely an example of what appears to be the Asians'
BG> totally different mindset and attitude towards learning in general.

RS> It proves SFA about anything much.

BG> Rubbish.  It proves that they try harder.  And generally succeed.

RS> You dont even know that, your particular example doesnt
RS> actually prove a damned thing about anything much.

BG> Wish I had some hard stats, but have you ever looked in the SMH or CM
BG> Uni results lists, and seen the large number of Asian names listed? 

Yes, but that says fuck all about your spelling example. Yes,
they do do better in the published results, but then so do
people like the jews, its just harder to see them in the lists.

In fact some research has just recently shown that ALL of the children
of immigrants do better than the natives. Its not that surprising either.

BG> I'd hazard a pretty good guess that on a per-capita basis, they
BG> do considerably better than Australian students do overall.

Yes, there isnt any doubt about that, I just meant your particularly
spelling example alone proved SFA about anything much. The full published
results are a different matter entirely.

RS> Doing well at spelling is primarily a result of a particular
RS> type of memory. Sure, if you dont have a very good memory for
RS> it, you can help with dedication, but thats not what those
RS> winners of competitions like that are usually, its normally
RS> just that they have the sort of memory that favours that task.

BG> It's not just spelling bees Rod, this applies across the board.

RS> Pity you fucked up using the spelling example then |-)

BG> No, it was exactly that, just an example.

Which proved sweet fuck all about anything much.

BG> The whole thread started when I commented upon the results of
BG> that particular competition, but it applies across the board.
BG> Very noticeable in the predominantly Chinese community schools
BG> like Sunnybank, which had one of the highest (if not the highest)
BG> overall Qld average TE score last year. Pretty impressive actually.

Sure, but its not necessarily just asians either. It just
happens that currently the bulk of the immigrants are asians.

BG> The simple OBSERVED fact is that the ethnic minorities (and
BG> especially asians) frequently just try harder, simple as that.

RS> Some do, some dont. The italians sure dont do too well at spelling |-)

BG> I suppose you'd notice that down your way too, and I'd
BG> agree (the Greeks aren't much better either).  However,
BG> I did actually qualify my previous assertion with
BG> "especially Asians", and it's demonstrably correct.

Its crap as a general statement. The Vietnamese in Sydney are very

(Continued to next message)

--- PQWK202