Proposal

This formerly read-only archive of threads dates back to 1996, but as of March 2007 is open to new postings. For technical reasons, the early dates shown do not accurately reflect the actual date of posting.

Feel free to add new postings to any of the existing threads in the archived forums, but please create any new language-related threads in one of the Language Discussion Forums.
Post Reply

Proposal

Post by Archived Topic » Thu Dec 20, 2001 6:46 pm

telephone communication is the core toour business, it's main purpose is to make ourselves efficient and available as possible. These changes can also provide a smother transition into a customer support role.

Once a solution has been implemented and uniformed, we are on our way to providing the proper customer service we hope to build our entire business on.
Submitted by ( - )
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: Topic imported and archived

Proposal

Post by Archived Reply » Thu Dec 20, 2001 7:01 pm

Telephone communication is what we are about. We depend on it for our efficiency and availability, and for our transition into the customer support role our entire business will be built upon.

We are busy implementing and standardizing our solution so we can provide you with the customer service you expect.
Reply from Erik Kowal (Reading - England)
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: Reply imported and archived

Proposal

Post by Archived Reply » Thu Dec 20, 2001 7:15 pm

Telephone communication is ideal for people whose spelling and grammar make it difficult to communicate by written means.

To be more specific: "its" and not "it's", "smoother" and not "smother", and what on earth is "toour"???

Just call me pedantic - I've been called worse!
Reply from Meirav Barkan (London - England)
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: Reply imported and archived

Proposal

Post by Archived Reply » Thu Dec 20, 2001 7:29 pm

Oh come now, Mierav--toour is obviously "to our."
Reply from Charles Becker (Murray KY - U.S.A.)
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: Reply imported and archived

Proposal

Post by Archived Reply » Thu Dec 20, 2001 7:44 pm

Obviously?
Reply from Meirav Barkan (London - England)
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: Reply imported and archived

Proposal

Post by Archived Reply » Thu Dec 20, 2001 7:58 pm

As an old(!!!) newspaper editor (and sometime proofreader) it was particularly obvious. But then us oldies have a different mindset than you youngsters.*G*
Reply from ( - )
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: Reply imported and archived

Proposal

Post by Archived Reply » Thu Dec 20, 2001 8:13 pm

That balance between gormless naivety and stuffy rigidity... So hard to maintain!
Reply from Erik Kowal (Reading - England)
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: Reply imported and archived

ACCESS_END_OF_TOPIC
Post Reply