Hacker News Reader

Comment by nupark2 | Hacker News Reader

It seems ponderousnessly unlikely that the principals of N-Control were not already aware of Paul Christoforo's loose grasp of ethics[1], customer service[2][3], and professionalism[4].

I'm not particularly convinced that the principals at N-Control aren't all that dissimilar to Paul Christoforo, or that he's not still somehow involved.

[1] His entire website is plagiarized: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0AnMPztotGCGadE1s...

[2] A previous example from 6 months ago: http://www.natesnetwork.com/Poor-customer-service

[3] They were dropped by a previous marketing firm when they brought Christoforo onboard: http://kotaku.com/5871400/cut-paul-oceanmarketting-christofo...

[4] The man can't even spell, much less formulate a vaguely grammatically correct sentence.

View on HN

I agree. N-Control appears to deserve neither the loyalty nor cash of its customers.

It's wild to me that people are giving you trouble for "can't" when "ponderousnessly" is clearly the more compelling target. (An odd choice even if rendered as "ponderously". "Clumsily unlikely?" Eh, okay, I guess you can have it.)

> To put it more plainly: picking apart a small typo here is gratuitous.

Yes, that's true, but when dropping the following, Caesar's wife must be above reproach to avoid comedic side effects:

> [4] The man can't even spell, much less formulate a vaguely grammatically correct sentence.

> It's wild to me that people are giving you trouble for "can't" when "ponderousnessly" is clearly the more compelling target. (An odd choice even if rendered as "ponderously". "Clumsily unlikely?" Eh, okay, I guess you can have it.)

I completely missed that one (and it's much more deserving than "can't"). I assume the size of the word caused most reader's eyes to flow right through it.

You win, regardless; ponderously was the intended word, aiming to convey the implication you've described.

That said, I wish the focus was on N-Control as an organization and the seemingly bizarre shadowy world of business they may inhabit, rather than my small missteps.

Deleted comment

[Fixed above]

While I understand that I risked the ire of grammar (and spelling) nazis by invoking an argument for professionalism in communication, let's be honest: a small typo is a far cry from a seemingly near complete inability to articulate a coherent thought.

To put it more plainly: picking apart a small typo here is gratuitous.

Am I the only one that finds it weird to compare a group of people that criticize others for spelling or grammar issues to another group that systematically annihilated millions of people?

Deleted comment

I believe a mistake of omission is different from being unable to distinguish a period and an apostrophe. Also, we are commenting online with each other, not responding in an official capacity to customer service inquiries.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphrys_law

can't

Reply on news.ycombinator.com