Re: RD BOO BOO.

["David Proctor" <thadocta@spam.ozemail.spam.com.spam.au>]

Gayford wrote in message <7jvnvg$os6$1@merki.connect.com.au>...
>RD is no worst for errors than any other comparable magazine.

Wanna bet? Modern Railways is a very accurate magazine, because it is
prepared by people who are prepared to check what they print BEFORE it is
printed. RAIL is a bit more like RD - the people on uk.railway REGULARLY
spell RAIL backwards, it is so inaccurate

>Its just
>because the rail fans that post to this site are such a knowledgeable bunch
>that they pick up errors that others wouldn't notice or care about.

No excuse. If anything, that makes it worse. People who read RD who may not
be as knowledgeable as others may actually believe what they read in RD.
When it is so easy to check on the information, then it is inexcuseable that
it is not done.

>There
>are many more errors in the daily newspapers. Again if you have specific
>knowledge of the subject in question its easy to pick up errors.

One would think the editor of a railway magazine would have the required
"specific knowledge" to detect the errors before they went to print.

DaveP