Timeline for Present tense reported speech
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 29, 2015 at 23:40 | history | edited | elc | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 72 characters in body
|
| Apr 29, 2015 at 11:30 | comment | added | FumbleFingers | Absolutely what @Nathan said. I got an inbox ping/notification because the SE software is smart enough to guess your comment must be a reply to mine. Thus I've been prompted to review and remove the downvote (and you won't get any more for that reason), so it's in your own interests on the rep front. But mainly it helps improve the site itself. It's up to you whether your revised answer still references original errors now corrected. Ask yourself whether it'll help future visitors, bearing in mind that we or the mods might delete these comments at any time, so you don't need to explain them. | |
| Apr 28, 2015 at 17:50 | comment | added | Nathan Tuggy | @elc: Go ahead and fix it. The only time to leave it is if there's no way to salvage an answer without wholly rewriting from premise on up. | |
| Apr 28, 2015 at 16:38 | history | edited | elc | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
revised to properly frame as simple vs present continous instead of horribly misusing active/passive
|
| Apr 28, 2015 at 16:31 | comment | added | elc | Ha ha, you are quite right. I'm not sure what made me think of "active vs passive" instead of "simple vs present continuous". Of course, other than that misreference, I stand by my answer. But now a conundrum...is it better to revise the answer or leave the error and correction as possibly useful clarification? | |
| Apr 28, 2015 at 15:35 | comment | added | FumbleFingers | -1 I don't think active/passive verb forms is remotely connected to this question. | |
| Apr 27, 2015 at 19:50 | history | answered | elc | CC BY-SA 3.0 |