"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"Marc J. Zeitlin" wrote in message
...
[...]
I'm willing to admit when I'm wrong - are you?

Sure. I'm not perfect. I have admitted to being wrong several times
here, the rare instances it happened.

My post was less-than-kind simply because your post was as well. I
realize Usenet is the perfect forum for petty nit-picking, but that
doesn't make it okay. Whether it's ded or dead, it was clear that
everyone involved knew what we were talking about. Your post had no
point, other than to (falsely, as it happens) claim some superior
knowledge. It contributed nothing to the discussion, and was no more
useful than a post the purpose of which was solely to correct a spelling
or grammar error.

Those kinds of posts **** me off. If it were actually important to
correct spelling or grammar errors here on Usenet, each thread would be
half messages about spelling and grammar. Clearly it's not important, but
still every now and then, some smug "I know something you don't" person
comes along and posts nothing but a correction to spelling or grammar.

Becuzz I'm in agreemint with youre pazishun about knot kerrecting posts
jest to bee doing somthing, I offer the following in regards to Dead
Reckoning:

The Dictionary of Misinformation says of the "deduced" theory, "There is no
evidence for such a belief." The Oxford English Dictionary says that the
term is from the adjective "dead" and doesn't deign to even discuss the
supposed derivation from "deduced". The Oxford Dictionary of English
Etymology provides the final nail in the coffin: "a proposed etym. ded., for
deduced, has no justification." [From:
http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/...eckoning.html]

Regards,

Casey