Could someone please re-check and correct the CODEX transcripts?

[Accordance Enthusiast]

@Nathan Parker, I am adding another example here to show the need to re-check. Should I tag someone else in these posts?

 

It is very clear to me that the transcript was not made from the manuscript, or it was never checked.

Of course, any transcript must be thoroughly checked before it will be accurate.

 

In Revelation 7:9 the Accordance module reads "ιδον και οχλον" but it should read "ιδον οχλον".

 

Inaccurate transcript:

 

Real manuscript:

 

 

Edited September 24, 2023 by Accordance Enthusiast

[Kristin]

6 minutes ago, Accordance Enthusiast said:

Should I tag someone else in these posts?

Hi @Accordance Enthusiast,

That is a good question. On Sept 13 @Nathan Parker spoke of sending something to "the head of our Corrections Department" so it seems like it would be good to learn who that person is so that they can also be tagged.

 

9 minutes ago, Accordance Enthusiast said:

It is very clear to me that the transcript was not made from the manuscript, or it was never checked.

I am unfortunately coming to the same conclusion.

[Abram K-J]

24 minutes ago, Kristin said:

On Sept 13 @Nathan Parker spoke of sending something to "the head of our Corrections Department" so it seems like it would be good to learn who that person is so that they can also be tagged.

 

I was also curious to learn more about the Corrections Department. 

[Dr. Nathan Parker]

Just keep posting the posts themselves. No need to tag anyone. If you've emailed the link of this thread to Corrections, we have it and can read it.

[Kristin]

2 hours ago, Nathan Parker said:

Just keep posting the posts themselves. No need to tag anyone.

Hi @Nathan Parker,
While that is good that this thread will get the messages to corrections, could you please let us know who the "head of our Corrections Department" is? @Accordance Enthusiast,  @Abram K-J, and myself have all expressed interest in clarification concerning your comment on Sept. 13. 

Thanks.
 

On 9/13/2023 at 10:06 AM, Nathan Parker said:

I'll also send this to the head of our Corrections Department. 

 

6 hours ago, Abram K-J said:

I was also curious to learn more about the Corrections Department. 

 

[Dr. Nathan Parker]

I'll DM all of you.

[Accordance Enthusiast]

Hi @Nathan Parker,

 

Here is another mistake I found today:

 

Revelation 8:2, the Alexandrinus transcript reads "εδοθησαν", but the manuscript reads "εδοθη".

 

Wrong transcript:

 

Actual manuscript:

 

I am really looking forward to see a complete revision of these modules.

 

[darrylmy]

On 9/22/2023 at 4:31 PM, Nathan Parker said:

I'll DM all of you.

@Nathan Parker, not sure why this needs to be discussed apart from the forums, but can you DM me this information as well? I'm also curious about who the head of the corrections department is as well, and the process for corrections. Thank you.

[Dr. Nathan Parker]

Forum notifications can become distracting when customers start tagging team members in random posts, so I refrain from mentioning team member's names. Feel free to tag me in posts that need attention, and I'll review them. 

 

In this post, however, I don't even need to be tagged in future posts about transcription corrections because I'm already following it. I'll see the discussion.

 

To clarify module corrections, it's not technically a separate "department", and I apologize if my original post was unclear. Module correction reports are reviewed then addressed by a module developer or someone who can make the corrections. Corrections are gradually made to modules, so we always appreciate your feedback.

[Accordance Enthusiast]

@Nathan Parker, Look at this one,

 

Shalom!

[Accordance Enthusiast]

@Nathan Parker, I am adding another example here, it is a real shame! 

 

Revelation 6:1, Sinaiticus really reads "λεγοντων" but the Accordance transcript reads "λεγοντως".

 

Not only is the Sinaiticus module wrong, but this wrong word was copied into the Alexandrinus module!

 

Inaccurate Sinaiticus transcript:

 

 

Actual manuscript:

 

Alexandrinus transcript:

 

Actual manuscript:

 

 

So, for the Alexandrinus the Accordance transcript still reads "λεγοντως" (based on the wrong Sinaiticus transcript!), but it should read "λεγοντος". 

 

This is a shame as it shows that the Sinaiticus transcript was used to create the Alexandrinus module, and in this case both the modules are wrong. 

[Accordance Enthusiast]

Another mistake in the Sinaiticus transcript.

 

Revelation 9:4, the transcript reads "αυταις" but the manuscript reads "αυτοις".

 

Transcript with mistake:

 

Actual manuscript:

 

[robrecht]

On 9/25/2023 at 2:45 PM, Nathan Parker said:

To clarify module corrections, it's not technically a separate "department", and I apologize if my original post was unclear. Module correction reports are reviewed then addressed by a module developer or someone who can make the corrections. Corrections are gradually made to modules, so we always appreciate your feedback.

Please define "gradually."

[Dr. Nathan Parker]

@Accordance Enthusiast Thanks!

 

@robrecht According to Webster's Dictionary in Accordance:

 

"Grad′u·al·ly, adv. 1. In a gradual manner.

 

2. In degree. [Obs.]

 

Human reason doth not only gradually, but specifically, differ from the fantastic reason of brutes."

[robrecht]

3 hours ago, Nathan Parker said:

@Accordance Enthusiast Thanks!

 

@robrecht According to Webster's Dictionary in Accordance:

 

"Grad′u·al·ly, adv. 1. In a gradual manner.

 

2. In degree. [Obs.]

 

Human reason doth not only gradually, but specifically, differ from the fantastic reason of brutes."

 

To be charitable, Nathan, I must presume that you have completely missed an important point in this thread. As Accordance Enthusiast noted, he has been waiting for years to see many previous corrections made. Mark Allison said there are thousands of error correction reports that have been sent in that haven't been corrected yet. Personally, I have sent in very serious, major corrections that have not been addressed in more than three years. Thus, I was not asking for a cute dictionary definition of the word "gradually;" rather, in context, I am asking just how you understand Accordance to be making corrections "gradually"? Does anyone at Accordance take this issue seriously? And, if so, who? And how might we address this concern to her/him?

[Dr. Nathan Parker]

My previous definition was more of a humorous definition.

 

In all serious, now that 14.0.8 is out and running overall-well on Sonoma, we're going to be reviewing the "ransom crashes" issues on Windows as well as the feedback on modules that need to be re-checked for corrections (including this very thread). @Accordance Enthusiast has tagged me in a bunch of forum threads to look at, and I have all those logged. if there are other "random crashes" threads you want me to log, re-tag me in them so I can compile a list of them. You can also do that with any other module-related threads you want me to log as well. Once we've reviewed the feedback, I'll followup here with answers.

[robrecht]

On 10/6/2023 at 8:00 PM, Nathan Parker said:

My previous definition was more of a humorous definition.

 

This is a serious topic. Why are thousands of corrections not being made for years?

 

Quote

In all serious, now that 14.0.8 is out and running overall-well on Sonoma, we're going to be reviewing the "ransom crashes" issues on Windows as well as the feedback on modules that need to be re-checked for corrections (including this very thread). @Accordance Enthusiast has tagged me in a bunch of forum threads to look at, and I have all those logged. if there are other "random crashes" threads you want me to log, re-tag me in them so I can compile a list of them. You can also do that with any other module-related threads you want me to log as well. Once we've reviewed the feedback, I'll followup here with answers.

 

These are all threads that you have already participated in, but if you tell me how to tag you in posts I will go back and find them for you.

[Dr. Nathan Parker]

To tag me in posts, if you hit the @ and start typing my name, that should tag me in posts. Messaging me a link to different posts would work too.

 

I've got a bunch of the "random crashes", but I might have overlooked some, so it would be great to ensure I have all of them to provide a stronger list of examples.

 

The corrections backlog question is one I'll be addressing shortly, and once I have an answer, I'll update here.

[Accordance Enthusiast]

I'm adding another example here. It should be clear that a few corrections won't solve the problem. ALL these codex transcripts need a complete re-check.

 

Revelation 10:2, the Accordance transcript reads "εξωθε[ν]" but the manuscript reads "εσωθε[ν]" - two opposite meanings!

 

 

Manuscript:

[Dr. Nathan Parker]

Are there any scholars or highly-skilled students that would be interested in either re-checking these modules or even a certain portion of these modules? I'm kicking around an idea we might want to try. I won't elaborate on it publicly yet since I don't want to over-promise something, but anyone that would be interested or who knows someone that could be interested is welcome to DM or email me.

[Kristin]

14 minutes ago, Nathan Parker said:

Are there any scholars or highly-skilled students that would be interested in either re-checking these modules or even a certain portion of these modules?...anyone that would be interested or who knows someone that could be interested is welcome to DM or email me.

 

Hi @Nathan Parker, @Accordance Enthusiast seems to already be doing that on this thread. I strongly feel that this thread is better than a DM, as this thread lets other users know of verses to be careful about, while a DM would keep Accordance users in the dark.

[Accordance Enthusiast]

I'll continue to post any such mistakes I may find in this thread, 

 

but please note that these were only spot checks based on my current research. 

 

I did not do a complete re-check of everything...

 

Hope that you do find someone or several people who can participate in a complete re-check.

[Dr. Nathan Parker]

@Kristin As @Accordance Enthusiast has mentioned, as he's found stuff, he is reporting them in this thread, and he's welcome to continue doing so. However, I spoke with him over DM before posting my comment today, and he isn't doing a full re-check at the moment.

 

In terms of my comment above, if someone knows someone interested in re-checking all or even part of the module, they can DM or email me. I'm tossing around an idea on how to speed up the re-checking of this and other modules, but I don't want to post it publicly until I've hammered it out a little more. In the meantime, I'm trying to just see if there's any interest.

[Kristin]

Hi @Nathan Parker,

Thanks for clarifying, and I will DM you about a thought I have.

[Dr. Nathan Parker]

Sounds good. Once we have something hammered out, I'll be willing to share something publicly. I'll appreciate any feedback.