"Mark Conrad". Waiting with anticipation for Mark to complete his speed
dictation test ;-).
"Spanky de Monkey" wrote:
>Because Mark Conrad really Stan Starinski, the wanna be EE who in reality
>done five works the counter at jack-in-the-box in New York.
That explains it then!
>>You claim that I posted that I could dictate at 600 wpm,
>>which I never posted.
>Stan can type that fast. He can do everything fast. Even screw his
>girlfriend. (latex). It takes him 6 seconds.
Yeh, that sounds increasingly like Conrad. What with his boasting of being
able to dictate 600 words in 6 seconds.
Let us see if he takes up the challenge and goes on this website that gives
you the typing test speed challenge. You read and copy from their test
document and then it automatically tells you how many words per minute you
have either typed or dictated using speech recognition at the end of the
test. Anybody else can try this as well.
http://www.now1technologies.com/typetest
The best I did was 154 words per minute using Dragon Pro speech recognition
and although it shows on the website as 87% accuracy, it was in fact 100%.
The second best I did was 149 words per minute @ 91% accuracy using Windows
speech recognition. I did this one twice. You can tell they are mine
because I have put my name by them and you can tell anyway, the dictation
ones are much faster than typing speeds in there. As mentioned above,
although it says 91%, it is in fact 100% and I will tell you why that is.
1. Because it is an American website (I am from the UK), the word 'colour'
came out as a spelling mistake whereas it is not. It is just the UK
spelling version of the US spelling color
2. Because there were a few hyphens in the document and spaces either side
of the hyphens, I had to say the word, then space bar, then hyphen, then
space bar again. At the end of the test, the errors included the words
'space bar', where I had dictated and said exactly that. So these can be
omitted from the error list.
3. Within the document, part of the passage was '1000's of full colour
newsletters' but instead of the 'numeral' of that number coming out, what
actually came out on screen was 'thousands'. This is also not an error
because it would have meant changing to 'spell mode' and then putting the
figure in with its punctuation and changing back to normal mode afterwards.
This would have slowed you down and change the word count. So this I
counted as allowable. You can too Mark.
4. The word e-mail came up quite often in the document as wrong but there
was nothing wrong with this at all and it was spelt fine. Sometimes in the
document, that word was capitalised and you had to take care to remember
this and everything after a full stop. There were also some words that were
capitalised and not after a full stop, so this was quite tricky.
So taking away these non- errors as it were, you could say it was 100%
accurate.
So come on Mark, don't be shy. I'm sure you can do this and don't forget to
put your name in the test document beforehand as I have done, so we all know
it's you. I will admit I had a few goes at it so you can too. ;-).
andy t
Similar Threads
