Mr. Stanford, did you really write these movie reviews? For starters, the correct spelling is "derring-do", not daring-do. I will assume that you didn't check your work and let AI fuck up your writing. Speaking of AI, the reference to a French phrase for a tiny, fancy appetizer didn't match your analytical skills. It was jarring, it didn't match the trivial nature of a pair of trivial action movies.
I've read your work for a long time. What I see here seems like a rush job to meet a deadline. Please do better.
Thank you for the correction on "derring-do." The piece you're referring to I wrote in 2019, well before the availability of AI agents some, but not I, use to write. Sorry you didn't like what I wrote seven years ago, but I appreciate you reading and caring enough to offer feedback, albeit feedback relaying your unfounded and inaccurate assumption that I used AI to write. That said, thanks again for the correction on "derring-do."
And I appreciate your candor! Question: how many times have you re-published, reposted or re-stacked this piece? I get differing opinions on what is eligible for certain publications but not others when it comes to re-publishing. Thanks. Sorry to offend.
I am not sure how many times I have re-published that piece. Generally, I try to find old essays that relate in some way to the main essay. If I write about Elon Musk, then I collect the old Musk essays, that sort of thing. As far as I understand it, everyone gets to make up their own rules here in Substackistan. And don't worry about offending me. You caught me at a bad time -- dealing with some family stuff -- and you caught a stray. Thanks for reading. You cannot possibly know how much it means that you do.
Mr. Stanford, did you really write these movie reviews? For starters, the correct spelling is "derring-do", not daring-do. I will assume that you didn't check your work and let AI fuck up your writing. Speaking of AI, the reference to a French phrase for a tiny, fancy appetizer didn't match your analytical skills. It was jarring, it didn't match the trivial nature of a pair of trivial action movies.
I've read your work for a long time. What I see here seems like a rush job to meet a deadline. Please do better.
Respectfully Submitted.
Ms. Hiatt,
Thank you for the correction on "derring-do." The piece you're referring to I wrote in 2019, well before the availability of AI agents some, but not I, use to write. Sorry you didn't like what I wrote seven years ago, but I appreciate you reading and caring enough to offer feedback, albeit feedback relaying your unfounded and inaccurate assumption that I used AI to write. That said, thanks again for the correction on "derring-do."
And I appreciate your candor! Question: how many times have you re-published, reposted or re-stacked this piece? I get differing opinions on what is eligible for certain publications but not others when it comes to re-publishing. Thanks. Sorry to offend.
I am not sure how many times I have re-published that piece. Generally, I try to find old essays that relate in some way to the main essay. If I write about Elon Musk, then I collect the old Musk essays, that sort of thing. As far as I understand it, everyone gets to make up their own rules here in Substackistan. And don't worry about offending me. You caught me at a bad time -- dealing with some family stuff -- and you caught a stray. Thanks for reading. You cannot possibly know how much it means that you do.