California continues to be a popular launching pad for spam. Some recent messages came with these return addresses:

Customer Care LK
Contact Us At: 2 0 3 3 S a n E l i j o A v e n u e # 4 7 0 , C a r d i f f B y T h e S e a , C A 9 2 0 0 7

List Manager M2, 249 South Highway 101, Suite #425 Solana Beach, CA 92075 (This one offered a link to unsubscribe, but I’ve stopped using them. I’ve been bombarded with spam since I last used a couple unsubscribe links.)

Spark Networks Plc
8383 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 800 Beverly Hills, CA 90211

In addition, someone named Jules using an e-mail address from a “Judith Tyson” sent out a message. He/she offered an address for opting out. Perhaps someone should use it for sending his own spam: juleblz@gmail.com

More to come.....

I.E. vs. E.G.

Writers tend to confuse these two, using i.e. when they really mean e.g.

I.e. , an abbreviation for id est, means 'that is,' and is used when clarifying a point.

E.g., exempli gratia, means 'for example,' and usually is what the writer intends.

Because readers aren’t as familiar with e.g., it’s best to avoid the abbreviation entirely, and replace it with complete words:

"....for example, A, B, and C."

or

"...such as, A, B, and C."

You're usually better off avoiding abbreviations altogether. Like industry jargon, they can confuse your readers and cause them to miss your message.

Know what the definition of loophole is? It’s any product or service that a Democrat realizes one day hasn’t been taxed. Well, a liberal Democrat politician from Wisconsin has found his loophole, and in typical Democrat fashion, he’s determined that the state will take its cut, even it it’s unjustified.

Rep. Fred Kessler, D-Milwaukee, has set his sights on gift cards, those ubiquitous and extremely convenient debit cards used to pay for everything from fast food to fast computers. Quoting Consumer Reports, Kessler says that approximately 19% of all cards go unused. Some are lost, others reach expiration. A common man would say that’s too bad, and move on. After all, another person’s loss is, well, that person’s loss. Perhaps the recipient will learn to take better care of his card next time, and use it accordingly.

Kessler, however, can’t simply walk away from a potential source of revenue. And an opportunity to wield the power of his position. He feels that the state, not the merchant, should profit from the oversight. In typical Peter Pan style, he says the money should go to the state treasury. That’s right: Money that one person willfully handed over to a business for the benefit of another person should be turned over to the state because, well, just because. That’s the way liberal Democrats think.

It’s the same sort of redistributionist mentality invoked by tin-chested African dictators. Problem is, Wisconsin simply has no claim to that money. By purchasing the gift card, the customer essentially entered into an agreement with the merchant. At no time did the customer invite or desire any involvement by the state.

But the state will get involved anyway, if Kessler has his way. He promises to introduce legislation that would force businesses to cough up the bulk of the unused funds. (They’d be allowed to keep a fraction to cover costs. How charitable of him.) His idea disregards the stated intentions of the purchaser; namely, that the dollars go to a business. If the customers wanted that state to benefit, they would cut a check to the state treasury.

Kessler has said that he prefers customers use their gift cards, but if they don’t, “I’d rather the state get the money.” No truer words were ever spoken by a liberal Democrat. They just can’t seem to give up their taxaholic, big-government ways. One hopes that reason will prevail, and this atrocious and un-American money grab—on par with the death tax, by the way—will be relegated to the dust bin.

Too often writers simply over-write. Sentences are long. Paragraphs are long. And the final piece—a memo, letter, or report—is much longer than it need be.

Clear, concise text can be achieved through proper editing. Spend a few moments tightening your copy, and your piece will exhibit the professional flair you seek. Whoever said “less is more” had it right.

Entire books have been written about editing. Here are some common writer’s mistakes.

Passive voice vs. active voice
In some cases—notably when delivering bad news—the passive voice is appropriate. But by using the active voice most other times you give your copy a sense of energy and vitality. The result is clear, concise text.

- The motor was repaired by Dave.
Dave repaired the motor.
- The contract was faxed to Bry Co. by Jenny on Monday.
Jenny faxed the contract to Bry Co. on Monday.
- Receipts and warranties should be sorted before filing.
Sort the receipts and warranties before filing.

Redundant adjectives
Watch for these (and many more), as they crop up in everyday speech and writing. Solution is in parentheses.

- Past history (history)
- Future projections (projections)
- Depreciate in value (depreciate)
- Filled to capacity (filled)
- Current status (status)
- 9:00 a.m. in the morning (9 a.m.)
- Few in number (few)
- Free of charge (free)

Overweight phrases
Get right to the point by cutting flab from your text. Simple editing may be all you need. Some examples include:

- It has come to our attention… (We learned…)
- Terry has the authorization to… (Terry may…)
- It is her expectation that… (She expects…)
- Many dealers were in attendance. (Many dealers attended.)
- Everyone was inclined to believe… (Everyone believed…)
- At the time the customers arrived… (When the customers arrived…)
- They all arrived at a consensus. (They agreed.)

Remember that the real work of writing is not done in the first draft. It’s done by means of fast but careful editing. So, invest another couple of minutes in a review and quick editing of your message and reap the benefit in clarity, power and memorability.

Just heard of a sad incident that involved UPS. A person sent some jewelry via UPS, and discovered later that it had been stolen while the package passed through UPS' distribution facility in Chicago. The thief cut into a locked bag--why was jewelry transported in a bag???--and stole jewelry from this person and one other. It is quite obvious that the jewelry was targeted, and that the thieves knew where to look.

UPS got in hot water a couple years ago when firearms were stolen while being shipped. Now we learn that other precious items may be at risk as well.

I'm sure UPS will argue that out of upteen million packages shipped each year only a few are mishandled by employees. Sorry, but that shouldn't happen at all. It's one thing to lose or damage a package, but no one should be tampering with another person's possessions.

Let's hope that UPS management learned from this incident. I mention it here as a word of caution to readers everywhere. Just wish I had heard about this long before the Christmas season.