<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
    <channel>
        <title>proofreading?</title>
        <description> After reading the Porcella article (which I loved), I can't help but wonder whether there is any proofreading done by the magazine at all. We can't expect windsurfers to know how to construct complete sentences, use &amp;quot;are&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;our&amp;quot; properly, or even punctuate. But is this knowledge not required for magazine editors? Porcella is too busy charging Jaws to care about grammar. What is the mag's excuse?</description>
        <link>http://forums.boardseekermag.com/read.php?2,4805,4805#msg-4805</link>
        <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 02:19:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>Phorum 5.2.19</generator>
        <item>
            <guid>http://forums.boardseekermag.com/read.php?2,4805,4805#msg-4805</guid>
            <title>proofreading?</title>
            <link>http://forums.boardseekermag.com/read.php?2,4805,4805#msg-4805</link>
            <description><![CDATA[ After reading the Porcella article (which I loved), I can't help but wonder whether there is any proofreading done by the magazine at all. We can't expect windsurfers to know how to construct complete sentences, use &quot;are&quot; and &quot;our&quot; properly, or even punctuate. But is this knowledge not required for magazine editors? Porcella is too busy charging Jaws to care about grammar. What is the mag's excuse?]]></description>
            <dc:creator>nycwindsurfer</dc:creator>
            <category>BOARDSEEKER MAGAZINE</category>
            <pubDate>Mon, 03 May 2010 08:13:19 +0000</pubDate>
        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>
