Mamas, Don't Let Your Changes Grow Up to Be Highlighted

By -
I have a large MS Word 2011 document in which I have now turned off highlighting for tracked changes about a dozen times. But every time I pull it back up the highlighting is turned back on! The problem is, if I forget to turn it back off before I print, I may get a couple of hundred useless pages printed out, because all of the text is too small to read (because it is made smaller to allow room for the change comments to show in the right margin).

Help! Is there a way to get this turned off for good? (I have already turned off track changes itself: it is the highlighting by which I am troubled.)

Comments

  1. antiahithophel4:20 PM

    Good afternoon, Dr. C.

    What if you do the following:


    1. Accept all changes
    2. Turn of tracking
    3. Select all.
    4. Copy.
    5. Open a new document.
    6. Paste.

    My hope is that the commnad will not follow the document. Then, you may be able to start "fresh."

    ReplyDelete
  2. gcallah4:39 PM

    Tru dat, antiahithopel? That is whack.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous1:51 AM

    Yes, It is whack, Gene. Surprisingly, though, many times, in a variety of software packages, this copy-paste everything into a fresh document tactic actually works.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous1:53 AM

    antiahithopel is making a good suggestion. For some reason, this is a solution to many of lifes problems when documents get too complicated.

    This works sometimes in Autocad too.

    ReplyDelete
  5. gcallah3:25 AM

    Oh, I believe that it might be the right way to "fix" this! I used to program. But it's crazy it won't stay off -- it's crazy it doesn't ask you every time you print "Do you really want teeny letters you can't read?"

    ReplyDelete
  6. gcallah2:09 PM

    You guys aren't going to believe this: I tried antiahithophel method, and "highlight changes" turned back on immediately after I pasted the text into the new document, even though I had just turned it off in the original one!

    ReplyDelete
  7. antiahithophel7:24 PM

    I can only imagine the frustration.

    I'm pretty much a dolt with anything software related, so I don't have any more suggestions. If I think of something I will, of course, share.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more