"Bruce" wrote in message
...
"Brimstone" wrote:

Anyone who doesn't know that the overhang at the rear of a vehicle moves
sideways as they turn and will hit anything in it's arc is a numbskull who
should be let out of the house on his/her own.


What about people who insert greengrocers' apostrophes and write the
opposite of what they intended to say?

Aren't they numbskulls* too? Should they be let out on their own?


* Or should that be "numbskull's"?

What about those people who have got nothing better to do than pick up on
people's typographical, grammatical and spelling errors, aren't they
numbskulls as well? Should they be allowed to use a computer?

On 10/10/2010 09:53, Brimstone wrote:

"Bruce" wrote in message
...
"Brimstone" wrote:

Anyone who doesn't know that the overhang at the rear of a vehicle moves
sideways as they turn and will hit anything in it's arc is a
numbskull who
should be let out of the house on his/her own.


What about people who insert greengrocers' apostrophes and write the
opposite of what they intended to say?

Aren't they numbskulls* too? Should they be let out on their own?


* Or should that be "numbskull's"?

What about those people who have got nothing better to do than pick up
on people's typographical, grammatical and spelling errors, aren't they
numbskulls as well? Should they be allowed to use a computer?



Hmm, touchy, touchy.

We'll be getting the "well, you know what I mean" response when it is
pointed out that, by virtue of their illiteracy, someone has written
utter scribble. When I used to lecture on English contract law I was
forever telling the gormless scrotes - all of whom had "achieved" A*
GCSE English, of course - that what they'd written meant something
completely different to what they thought it meant. This, in contractual
terms could have meant an utter disaster. Yet, throughout their
schooling years punctuation and grammar had been totally ignored,
perhaps because the students had been taught by illiterates.

Still, given that now, it seems, the educational norm is to be
illiterate - and innumerate, which is part of the same problem - I
suppose we'll have to accept the NUT has achieved a measure of social
equality in dumbing everybody down.

--
Moving things in still pictures

On 10 Oct, 10:23, ®i©ardo wrote:
On 10/10/2010 09:53, Brimstone wrote:







"Bruce" wrote in message
.. .
"Brimstone" wrote:

Anyone who doesn't know that the overhang at the rear of a vehicle moves
sideways as they turn and will hit anything in it's arc is a
numbskull who
should be let out of the house on his/her own.

What about people who insert greengrocers' apostrophes and write the
opposite of what they intended to say?

Aren't they numbskulls* too? Should they be let out on their own?

* Or should that be "numbskull's"?

What about those people who have got nothing better to do than pick up
on people's typographical, grammatical and spelling errors, aren't they
numbskulls as well? Should they be allowed to use a computer?

Hmm, touchy, touchy.

We'll be getting the "well, you know what I mean" response when it is
pointed out that, by virtue of their illiteracy, someone has written
utter scribble. When I used to lecture on English contract law I was
forever telling the gormless scrotes - all of whom had "achieved" A*
GCSE English, of course - that what they'd written meant something
completely different to what they thought it meant. This, in contractual
terms could have meant an utter disaster. Yet, throughout their
schooling years punctuation and grammar had been totally ignored,
perhaps because the students had been taught by illiterates.

Still, given that now, it seems, the educational norm is to be
illiterate - and innumerate, which is part of the same problem - I
suppose we'll have to accept the NUT has achieved a measure of social
equality in dumbing everybody down.

Teachers tried to teach me various things. Some I had a knack for and
took in; others I never really understood and didn't bother with.
There's no reason for punctuation to be any different from anything
else that one can be taught.

As for numeracy, I seem to remember my grandparents thinking that use
of calculators was "cheating", because basic arithmetic was the most
advanced mathematical concept that they'd ever been tested on. I
tried to explain that we were learning concepts way beyond arithmetic
and were using calcutors to save time, and that no marks were given
for the correctness of the arithmetic. So I'd say that things had
certainly advanced a lot between their generation and mine. It seems
likely that they have continued to do so.

There may be less memorising and chanting, more more understanding.

(The people who most annoyed me over the years where examiners who
said the opposite of what they meant through use of "may" instead of
"might", eg "extra tuition may have helped them" when they meant
"extra tuition might have helped them".)

On 10/10/2010 12:24, MIG wrote:
On 10 Oct, 10:23, wrote:
On 10/10/2010 09:53, Brimstone wrote:







wrote in message
...
wrote:

Anyone who doesn't know that the overhang at the rear of a vehicle moves
sideways as they turn and will hit anything in it's arc is a
numbskull who
should be let out of the house on his/her own.

What about people who insert greengrocers' apostrophes and write the
opposite of what they intended to say?

Aren't they numbskulls* too? Should they be let out on their own?

* Or should that be "numbskull's"?

What about those people who have got nothing better to do than pick up
on people's typographical, grammatical and spelling errors, aren't they
numbskulls as well? Should they be allowed to use a computer?

Hmm, touchy, touchy.

We'll be getting the "well, you know what I mean" response when it is
pointed out that, by virtue of their illiteracy, someone has written
utter scribble. When I used to lecture on English contract law I was
forever telling the gormless scrotes - all of whom had "achieved" A*
GCSE English, of course - that what they'd written meant something
completely different to what they thought it meant. This, in contractual
terms could have meant an utter disaster. Yet, throughout their
schooling years punctuation and grammar had been totally ignored,
perhaps because the students had been taught by illiterates.

Still, given that now, it seems, the educational norm is to be
illiterate - and innumerate, which is part of the same problem - I
suppose we'll have to accept the NUT has achieved a measure of social
equality in dumbing everybody down.

Teachers tried to teach me various things. Some I had a knack for and
took in; others I never really understood and didn't bother with.
There's no reason for punctuation to be any different from anything
else that one can be taught.


Very true, but, given patience anything can be taught but these days it
seems that many in the teaching profession just can't be bothered to do
so. Indeed, there seems to be some sort of perverse pride in not
correcting errors, whether that be in our language or in mathematical
calculations. If students are not advised where they are going wrong,
they will never learn that what they are doing is wrong.

As for numeracy, I seem to remember my grandparents thinking that use
of calculators was "cheating", because basic arithmetic was the most
advanced mathematical concept that they'd ever been tested on. I
tried to explain that we were learning concepts way beyond arithmetic
and were using calcutors to save time, and that no marks were given
for the correctness of the arithmetic. So I'd say that things had
certainly advanced a lot between their generation and mine. It seems
likely that they have continued to do so.

There may be less memorising and chanting, more more understanding.


Understanding of what, if the student is unable to do simple addition,
subtraction and multiplication? If they are employed say, in a bar, and
can't add up the price of three drinks in order to give the correct
change from a £10 note what use is that to man or beast? If they make a
purchase and are unable to comprehend that they have been short changed,
how does that help them?

Unfortunately you sum the real tragedy of the matter with your comment:
"...others I never really understood and didn't bother with".

My son had terrible problems with algebra, in particular, which his
school seemed totally unwilling to address, and this was also something
that my wife had given up on at school, which follows your telling
comment about never having really understood and the inevitable
consequences. I put together several pages of notes, working matters
through step by step and giving examples of increasing complexity plus
exercises in applying the principles.

I'm glad to say that it worked and, interestingly enough, my wife worked
her way through my notes and said that if only someone had bothered to
explain things properly all those years ago life would have been a lot
easier.

(The people who most annoyed me over the years where examiners who
said the opposite of what they meant through use of "may" instead of
"might", eg "extra tuition may have helped them" when they meant
"extra tuition might have helped them".)


--
Moving things in still pictures

"®i©ardo" wrote in message
...
On 10/10/2010 12:24, MIG wrote:
On 10 Oct, 10:23, wrote:
On 10/10/2010 09:53, Brimstone wrote:







wrote in message
...
wrote:

Anyone who doesn't know that the overhang at the rear of a vehicle
moves
sideways as they turn and will hit anything in it's arc is a
numbskull who
should be let out of the house on his/her own.

What about people who insert greengrocers' apostrophes and write the
opposite of what they intended to say?

Aren't they numbskulls* too? Should they be let out on their own?

* Or should that be "numbskull's"?

What about those people who have got nothing better to do than pick up
on people's typographical, grammatical and spelling errors, aren't they
numbskulls as well? Should they be allowed to use a computer?

Hmm, touchy, touchy.

We'll be getting the "well, you know what I mean" response when it is
pointed out that, by virtue of their illiteracy, someone has written
utter scribble. When I used to lecture on English contract law I was
forever telling the gormless scrotes - all of whom had "achieved" A*
GCSE English, of course - that what they'd written meant something
completely different to what they thought it meant. This, in contractual
terms could have meant an utter disaster. Yet, throughout their
schooling years punctuation and grammar had been totally ignored,
perhaps because the students had been taught by illiterates.

Still, given that now, it seems, the educational norm is to be
illiterate - and innumerate, which is part of the same problem - I
suppose we'll have to accept the NUT has achieved a measure of social
equality in dumbing everybody down.

Teachers tried to teach me various things. Some I had a knack for and
took in; others I never really understood and didn't bother with.
There's no reason for punctuation to be any different from anything
else that one can be taught.


Very true, but, given patience anything can be taught but these days it
seems that many in the teaching profession just can't be bothered to do
so. Indeed, there seems to be some sort of perverse pride in not
correcting errors, whether that be in our language or in mathematical
calculations. If students are not advised where they are going wrong, they
will never learn that what they are doing is wrong.

As for numeracy, I seem to remember my grandparents thinking that use
of calculators was "cheating", because basic arithmetic was the most
advanced mathematical concept that they'd ever been tested on. I
tried to explain that we were learning concepts way beyond arithmetic
and were using calcutors to save time, and that no marks were given
for the correctness of the arithmetic. So I'd say that things had
certainly advanced a lot between their generation and mine. It seems
likely that they have continued to do so.

There may be less memorising and chanting, more more understanding.


Understanding of what, if the student is unable to do simple addition,
subtraction and multiplication? If they are employed say, in a bar, and
can't add up the price of three drinks in order to give the correct change
from a £10 note what use is that to man or beast? If they make a purchase
and are unable to comprehend that they have been short changed, how does
that help them?

Unfortunately you sum the real tragedy of the matter with your comment:
"...others I never really understood and didn't bother with".

My son had terrible problems with algebra, in particular, which his school
seemed totally unwilling to address, and this was also something that my
wife had given up on at school, which follows your telling comment about
never having really understood and the inevitable consequences. I put
together several pages of notes, working matters through step by step and
giving examples of increasing complexity plus exercises in applying the
principles.

I'm glad to say that it worked and, interestingly enough, my wife worked
her way through my notes and said that if only someone had bothered to
explain things properly all those years ago life would have been a lot
easier.

And the practical use of algebra to the vast majority of people is what?

On 10 Oct, 15:03, "Brimstone" wrote:
"®i©ardo" wrote in message

...



On 10/10/2010 12:24, MIG wrote:
On 10 Oct, 10:23, *wrote:
On 10/10/2010 09:53, Brimstone wrote:

*wrote in message
m...
*wrote:

Anyone who doesn't know that the overhang at the rear of a vehicle
moves
sideways as they turn and will hit anything in it's arc is a
numbskull who
should be let out of the house on his/her own.

What about people who insert greengrocers' apostrophes and write the
opposite of what they intended to say?

Aren't they numbskulls* too? Should they be let out on their own?

* Or should that be "numbskull's"?

What about those people who have got nothing better to do than pick up
on people's typographical, grammatical and spelling errors, aren't they
numbskulls as well? Should they be allowed to use a computer?

Hmm, touchy, touchy.

We'll be getting the "well, you know what I mean" response when it is
pointed out that, by virtue of their illiteracy, someone has written
utter scribble. When I used to lecture on English contract law I was
forever telling the gormless scrotes - all of whom had "achieved" A*
GCSE English, of course - that what they'd written meant something
completely different to what they thought it meant. This, in contractual
terms could have meant an utter disaster. Yet, throughout their
schooling years punctuation and grammar had been totally ignored,
perhaps because the students had been taught by illiterates.

Still, given that now, it seems, the educational norm is to be
illiterate - and innumerate, which is part of the same problem - I
suppose we'll have to accept the NUT has achieved a measure of social
equality in dumbing everybody down.

Teachers tried to teach me various things. *Some I had a knack for and
took in; others I never really understood and didn't bother with.
There's no reason for punctuation to be any different from anything
else that one can be taught.

Very true, but, given patience anything can be taught but these days it
seems that many in the teaching profession just can't be bothered to do
so. Indeed, there seems to be some sort of perverse pride in not
correcting errors, whether that be in our language or in mathematical
calculations. If students are not advised where they are going wrong, they
will never learn that what they are doing is wrong.

As for numeracy, I seem to remember my grandparents thinking that use
of calculators was "cheating", because basic arithmetic was the most
advanced mathematical concept that they'd ever been tested on. *I
tried to explain that we were learning concepts way beyond arithmetic
and were using calcutors to save time, and that no marks were given
for the correctness of the arithmetic. *So I'd say that things had
certainly advanced a lot between their generation and mine. *It seems
likely that they have continued to do so.

There may be less memorising and chanting, more more understanding.

Understanding of what, if the student is unable to do simple addition,
subtraction and multiplication? *If they are employed say, in a bar, and
can't add up the price of three drinks in order to give the correct change
from a £10 note what use is that to man or beast? If they make a purchase
and are unable to comprehend that they have been short changed, how does
that help them?

Unfortunately you sum the real tragedy of the matter with your comment:
"...others I never really understood and didn't bother with".

My son had terrible problems with algebra, in particular, which his school
seemed totally unwilling to address, and this was also something that my
wife had given up on at school, which follows your telling comment about
never having really understood and the inevitable consequences. I put
together several pages of notes, working matters through step by step and
giving examples of increasing complexity plus exercises in applying the
principles.

I'm glad to say that it worked and, interestingly enough, my wife worked
her way through my notes and said that if only someone had bothered to
explain things properly all those years ago life would have been a lot
easier.

And the practical use of algebra to the vast majority of people is what?

They probably don't realise they are using it, as in Amount Tendered
minus Total Bill equals Change.

"MIG" wrote in message
...
On 10 Oct, 15:03, "Brimstone" wrote:

And the practical use of algebra to the vast majority of people is what?

They probably don't realise they are using it, as in Amount Tendered
minus Total Bill equals Change.

Otherwise known as arithmetic.

On 10/10/2010 15:03, Brimstone wrote:

"®i©ardo" wrote in message
...
On 10/10/2010 12:24, MIG wrote:
On 10 Oct, 10:23, wrote:
On 10/10/2010 09:53, Brimstone wrote:







wrote in message
...
wrote:

Anyone who doesn't know that the overhang at the rear of a
vehicle moves
sideways as they turn and will hit anything in it's arc is a
numbskull who
should be let out of the house on his/her own.

What about people who insert greengrocers' apostrophes and write the
opposite of what they intended to say?

Aren't they numbskulls* too? Should they be let out on their own?

* Or should that be "numbskull's"?

What about those people who have got nothing better to do than pick up
on people's typographical, grammatical and spelling errors, aren't
they
numbskulls as well? Should they be allowed to use a computer?

Hmm, touchy, touchy.

We'll be getting the "well, you know what I mean" response when it is
pointed out that, by virtue of their illiteracy, someone has written
utter scribble. When I used to lecture on English contract law I was
forever telling the gormless scrotes - all of whom had "achieved" A*
GCSE English, of course - that what they'd written meant something
completely different to what they thought it meant. This, in
contractual
terms could have meant an utter disaster. Yet, throughout their
schooling years punctuation and grammar had been totally ignored,
perhaps because the students had been taught by illiterates.

Still, given that now, it seems, the educational norm is to be
illiterate - and innumerate, which is part of the same problem - I
suppose we'll have to accept the NUT has achieved a measure of social
equality in dumbing everybody down.

Teachers tried to teach me various things. Some I had a knack for and
took in; others I never really understood and didn't bother with.
There's no reason for punctuation to be any different from anything
else that one can be taught.


Very true, but, given patience anything can be taught but these days
it seems that many in the teaching profession just can't be bothered
to do so. Indeed, there seems to be some sort of perverse pride in not
correcting errors, whether that be in our language or in mathematical
calculations. If students are not advised where they are going wrong,
they will never learn that what they are doing is wrong.

As for numeracy, I seem to remember my grandparents thinking that use
of calculators was "cheating", because basic arithmetic was the most
advanced mathematical concept that they'd ever been tested on. I
tried to explain that we were learning concepts way beyond arithmetic
and were using calcutors to save time, and that no marks were given
for the correctness of the arithmetic. So I'd say that things had
certainly advanced a lot between their generation and mine. It seems
likely that they have continued to do so.

There may be less memorising and chanting, more more understanding.


Understanding of what, if the student is unable to do simple addition,
subtraction and multiplication? If they are employed say, in a bar,
and can't add up the price of three drinks in order to give the
correct change from a £10 note what use is that to man or beast? If
they make a purchase and are unable to comprehend that they have been
short changed, how does that help them?

Unfortunately you sum the real tragedy of the matter with your
comment: "...others I never really understood and didn't bother with".

My son had terrible problems with algebra, in particular, which his
school seemed totally unwilling to address, and this was also
something that my wife had given up on at school, which follows your
telling comment about never having really understood and the
inevitable consequences. I put together several pages of notes,
working matters through step by step and giving examples of increasing
complexity plus exercises in applying the principles.

I'm glad to say that it worked and, interestingly enough, my wife
worked her way through my notes and said that if only someone had
bothered to explain things properly all those years ago life would
have been a lot easier.

And the practical use of algebra to the vast majority of people is what?



Possibly none at all to the vast majority of people, but indispensable
to any one involved with physics and many branches of engineering. You
could say exactly the same about calculus yet its value is unquestioned
in the disciplines just mentioned.

It's not a lot of use for a miserable ex-train driver though.

--
Moving things in still pictures

"®i©ardo" wrote in message
...
On 10/10/2010 15:03, Brimstone wrote:

"®i©ardo" wrote in message
...
On 10/10/2010 12:24, MIG wrote:
On 10 Oct, 10:23, wrote:
On 10/10/2010 09:53, Brimstone wrote:







wrote in message
...
wrote:

Anyone who doesn't know that the overhang at the rear of a
vehicle moves
sideways as they turn and will hit anything in it's arc is a
numbskull who
should be let out of the house on his/her own.

What about people who insert greengrocers' apostrophes and write the
opposite of what they intended to say?

Aren't they numbskulls* too? Should they be let out on their own?

* Or should that be "numbskull's"?

What about those people who have got nothing better to do than pick
up
on people's typographical, grammatical and spelling errors, aren't
they
numbskulls as well? Should they be allowed to use a computer?

Hmm, touchy, touchy.

We'll be getting the "well, you know what I mean" response when it is
pointed out that, by virtue of their illiteracy, someone has written
utter scribble. When I used to lecture on English contract law I was
forever telling the gormless scrotes - all of whom had "achieved" A*
GCSE English, of course - that what they'd written meant something
completely different to what they thought it meant. This, in
contractual
terms could have meant an utter disaster. Yet, throughout their
schooling years punctuation and grammar had been totally ignored,
perhaps because the students had been taught by illiterates.

Still, given that now, it seems, the educational norm is to be
illiterate - and innumerate, which is part of the same problem - I
suppose we'll have to accept the NUT has achieved a measure of social
equality in dumbing everybody down.

Teachers tried to teach me various things. Some I had a knack for and
took in; others I never really understood and didn't bother with.
There's no reason for punctuation to be any different from anything
else that one can be taught.


Very true, but, given patience anything can be taught but these days
it seems that many in the teaching profession just can't be bothered
to do so. Indeed, there seems to be some sort of perverse pride in not
correcting errors, whether that be in our language or in mathematical
calculations. If students are not advised where they are going wrong,
they will never learn that what they are doing is wrong.

As for numeracy, I seem to remember my grandparents thinking that use
of calculators was "cheating", because basic arithmetic was the most
advanced mathematical concept that they'd ever been tested on. I
tried to explain that we were learning concepts way beyond arithmetic
and were using calcutors to save time, and that no marks were given
for the correctness of the arithmetic. So I'd say that things had
certainly advanced a lot between their generation and mine. It seems
likely that they have continued to do so.

There may be less memorising and chanting, more more understanding.


Understanding of what, if the student is unable to do simple addition,
subtraction and multiplication? If they are employed say, in a bar,
and can't add up the price of three drinks in order to give the
correct change from a £10 note what use is that to man or beast? If
they make a purchase and are unable to comprehend that they have been
short changed, how does that help them?

Unfortunately you sum the real tragedy of the matter with your
comment: "...others I never really understood and didn't bother with".

My son had terrible problems with algebra, in particular, which his
school seemed totally unwilling to address, and this was also
something that my wife had given up on at school, which follows your
telling comment about never having really understood and the
inevitable consequences. I put together several pages of notes,
working matters through step by step and giving examples of increasing
complexity plus exercises in applying the principles.

I'm glad to say that it worked and, interestingly enough, my wife
worked her way through my notes and said that if only someone had
bothered to explain things properly all those years ago life would
have been a lot easier.

And the practical use of algebra to the vast majority of people is what?



Possibly none at all to the vast majority of people, but indispensable to
any one involved with physics and many branches of engineering. You could
say exactly the same about calculus yet its value is unquestioned in the
disciplines just mentioned.

Indeed.

It's not a lot of use for a miserable ex-train driver though.

It's not a lot of use for the vast majority of people then. I'm glad we
agreed on that.

On 10 Oct, 14:19, ®i©ardo wrote:
On 10/10/2010 12:24, MIG wrote:





On 10 Oct, 10:23, *wrote:
On 10/10/2010 09:53, Brimstone wrote:

*wrote in message
...
*wrote:

Anyone who doesn't know that the overhang at the rear of a vehicle moves
sideways as they turn and will hit anything in it's arc is a
numbskull who
should be let out of the house on his/her own.

What about people who insert greengrocers' apostrophes and write the
opposite of what they intended to say?

Aren't they numbskulls* too? Should they be let out on their own?

* Or should that be "numbskull's"?

What about those people who have got nothing better to do than pick up
on people's typographical, grammatical and spelling errors, aren't they
numbskulls as well? Should they be allowed to use a computer?

Hmm, touchy, touchy.

We'll be getting the "well, you know what I mean" response when it is
pointed out that, by virtue of their illiteracy, someone has written
utter scribble. When I used to lecture on English contract law I was
forever telling the gormless scrotes - all of whom had "achieved" A*
GCSE English, of course - that what they'd written meant something
completely different to what they thought it meant. This, in contractual
terms could have meant an utter disaster. Yet, throughout their
schooling years punctuation and grammar had been totally ignored,
perhaps because the students had been taught by illiterates.

Still, given that now, it seems, the educational norm is to be
illiterate - and innumerate, which is part of the same problem - I
suppose we'll have to accept the NUT has achieved a measure of social
equality in dumbing everybody down.

Teachers tried to teach me various things. *Some I had a knack for and
took in; others I never really understood and didn't bother with.
There's no reason for punctuation to be any different from anything
else that one can be taught.

Very true, but, given patience anything can be taught but these days it
seems that many in the teaching profession just can't be bothered to do
so. Indeed, there seems to be some sort of perverse pride in not
correcting errors, whether that be in our language or in mathematical
calculations. If students are not advised where they are going wrong,
they will never learn that what they are doing is wrong.

As for numeracy, I seem to remember my grandparents thinking that use
of calculators was "cheating", because basic arithmetic was the most
advanced mathematical concept that they'd ever been tested on. *I
tried to explain that we were learning concepts way beyond arithmetic
and were using calcutors to save time, and that no marks were given
for the correctness of the arithmetic. *So I'd say that things had
certainly advanced a lot between their generation and mine. *It seems
likely that they have continued to do so.

There may be less memorising and chanting, more more understanding.

Understanding of what, if the student is unable to do simple addition,
subtraction and multiplication? *If they are employed say, in a bar, and
can't add up the price of three drinks in order to give the correct
change from a £10 note what use is that to man or beast? If they make a
purchase and are unable to comprehend that they have been short changed,
how does that help them?

Unfortunately you sum the real tragedy of the matter with your comment:
"...others I never really understood and didn't bother with".

My son had terrible problems with algebra, in particular, which his
school seemed totally unwilling to address, and this was also something
that my wife had given up on at school, which follows your telling
comment about never having really understood and the inevitable
consequences. I put together several pages of notes, working matters
through step by step and giving examples of increasing complexity plus
exercises in applying the principles.

I'm glad to say that it worked and, interestingly enough, my wife worked
her way through my notes and said that if only someone had bothered to
explain things properly all those years ago life would have been a lot
easier.

This is probably true, although I don't see that the situation is
getting worse. Pupils also make wrong assumptions.

The lessons I bothered least with were in history, because I wrongly
assumed it was about remembering dates and facts. Now I recognise
that it is probably the most important "subject" of all. Would I have
listened at the time if a teacher had tried to convince me? Probably
not. I would just focus on what I had a knack for.

Some people just don't get punctuation. I do. It's not because I am
convinced of its importance; I just tend to get it right because I can.