Is my adaptor safe?

[winston1]

Whenever we buy anything we take a risk but consumer products sold in the UK have to meet certain safety standards whereas products which are sold from who knows where may well fall short of those standards and the retailer difficult to pursue due to his location.The radio was bought from Argos

Fully understand that. So why didn't you buy your replacement adapter from a UK supplier such as Maplins?

As an aside does your new radio include DAB+, unlike your old one which didn't? If not you will soon find it no longer works and will need replacing again. DAB+ is the latest generation of DAB (which is now 20 year old technology). Most countries have already converted to DAB+ and the UK will eventually. There are already new stations in most areas using DAB+ which an original DAB radio can't receive. Sadly shops such as Argos and most supermarkets are off loading original DAB only radios on an unsuspecting public

 

[ban-all-sheds]

(and I'd be very surprised if the same is not also true of BAS, even if your typing irritated the school teacher within him!).

I feel I should point out that I don't pick up on every mistake people make (if you look closely at the quote in my post you'll see that is the case), but sometimes mistakes are so egregious that I feel they should be flagged.

"wella s d=themanufacturer" is a bit more wonky than "there" instead of "their"....

 

[JohnW2]

I feel I should point out that I don't pick up on every mistake people make (if you look closely at the quote in my post you'll see that is the case), but sometimes mistakes are so egregious that I feel they should be flagged.

It's obviously up to you to decide what you feel you need to 'flag'.

"wella s d=themanufacturer" is a bit more wonky than "there" instead of "their"....

Certainly more 'wonky', but just typographical and easily 'deciphered' by anyone remotely intelligent. If I thought for long enough, I might be able to think of an example where a there/their/they're mistake might possibly be ambiguous - but even if such examples exist they must be very rare, and the intended meaning is therefore,again, virtually always clear - even if a part of me is 'irritated' by such errors.

Having said that I have to say that I'm sometimes guilty of 'there/their/they're (and similar) mistakes' (and therefore 'irritate myself'!!) - not because I don't know what word should be used but, rather, because my brain and/or fingers sometimes conspire to type 'phonetically'. However, I don't think that is a reflection on my intelligence, knowledge of language or the accuracy of information I am attempting to communicate.

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

Agreed, but that was just an example.

I did actually say the OP's was not poor grammar and spelling but just careless.
That is - he didn't care how he appeared.

The next time a good example arises I shall highlight it.

John says he can decipher these things (certainly better than I can) but how can he be sure and know where to draw the line?

 

[JohnW2]

I did actually say the OP's was not poor grammar and spelling but just careless.
That is - he didn't care how he appeared.

Indeed. In fact, one can but presume that he didn't actually look at what he'd typed, since, if he had, he would surely have seen what needed to be corrected. A bit like a chef not tasting his/her food. As you say, presumably an indication that he is not concerned about "how he appeared" - but I imagine that is how a good few people feel about their (anonymous) participation in an internet forum.

Even I, who do my best (not always successfully!) to avoid (or detect and correct) spelling, grammatical and typographical errors, am far less fastidious about these things when posting to an internet forum, or even writing personal letters, than when writing 'professionally'. So, I suppose, I am much less concerned about "how I appear" in places like this.

John says he can decipher these things (certainly better than I can) but how can he be sure and know where to draw the line?

I suppose the short answer is 'common sense'. If I feel that there is any uncertainty/ambiguity, I will ask for clarification, but in most cases it will be quite obvious to me (and to you, and to BAS) what meaning was intended.

Kind Regards, John

 

[donmaico]

And if Argos are found to be selling flaky products they face prosecution and reputational damage.

When eBay or Amazon provide the means for individuals to import flaky products from abroad then nobody gets prosecuted and nobody's reputation suffers.

precisely my thoughts

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Certainly more 'wonky', but just typographical and easily 'deciphered' by anyone remotely intelligent.

I never claimed otherwise.

All I said was that I he ought to pay more attention when typing.

Another thing I do not claim otherwise is that you do not agree with that.

 

[JohnW2]

I never claimed otherwise. All I said was that I he ought to pay more attention when typing.

... and I have no disagreement with that.

Another thing I do not claim otherwise is that you do not agree with that.

That probably qualifies as something that I would regard as 'less effective communication' than many a sentence full of spelling, grammatical and typographic errors (does the sentence have the same meaning as it would have done without the word "otherwise", or does that change the meaning?) Whatever you are trying to communicate, as above, I agree that he ought to pay more attention to his typing - although I personally would probably not tell someone that soon after I had first 'met' them!

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Yes, if you remove "otherwise" it reverses the meaning.

So what I am not claiming is that you agree that he ought to pay more attention when typing.

 

[JohnW2]

Yes, if you remove "otherwise" it reverses the meaning.

OK - in which case, as I said, I would regard that as 'less effective communication' than many a sentence full of spelling, grammatical and typographic errors. I don't regard myself as particularly poorly educated or as having poor command of English, but I struggled to work out what you were trying to communicate.

So what I am not claiming is that you agree that he ought to pay more attention when typing.

Fair enough. In that case, as I said, whether you claim it or not, I do agree that he ought to pay more attention when typing. However, as I also said, whether I would personally tell someone that when I had only recently 'met' them is a different question.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

In that case, as I said, whether you claim it or not, I do agree that he ought to pay more attention when typing. However, as I also said, whether I would personally tell someone that when I had only recently 'met' them is a different question.

Ah.

So that will be why you made all those posts concerning the merits of calling attention to mistakes per se, rather than the acceptability of doing so at an early stage.

Gotcha.

 

[JohnW2]

Ah.

It's no new revelation. I merely repeated what I had written in my previous post!

So that will be why you made all those posts concerning the merits of calling attention to mistakes per se, rather than the acceptability of doing so at an early stage. Gotcha.

Not really. My personal view remains that what matters is 'effective communication', and provided that is achieved, I would very rarely say anything to the perpetrator (unless, perhaps, it was a close family member or close friend, or in the context of my working life) at either an early or late stage.

That does not alter the fact I agree, as a generalisation, that people 'ought' to avoid mistakes (in relation to written words or whatever). However, unless that impacts on me (e.g. impairs effective communication) that is really their problem, with which I would not normally choose to involve myself.

Kind Regards, John