Continued from General BJ Discussion forum
 

Old thread was locked:
http://www.drycounty.com/jovitalk/sh...=40560&page=13

Hmm..somehow I do understand why the thread was destined to get locked. What I dont get tho, is that it gets locked before Im able to respond to Iceman and Thomas Anderson's questions. I will try to do that here then.

First to Iceman:

Well, since i turn 30 this year and 2007-1995 = 12......my age back then in 1995 would be 17 instead of the 15 you write. Ive been working with the internet (both webdesign and programming in general) pretty much my entire life since 1994 but I could as well say to you that I find it hard to believe you also used the WWW back then. It'd make as much sense and sound just as arrogant as your above assumption.

Sure. You just rewrote it to sound better now. What you were indicating was that you prefer irrelevant well-written poll-posts rather than relevant interesting posts with some grammar errors. Everyone prefers good (well-written?) posts to badly written ones.

It's a forum. We all have different opinions here :)

So...people being lazy justifies you acting inpolite and rude. That sounds horribly wrong and naive. You may not act like your in control on purpose, but your writing certainly indicates some high level of self-confidence, snobbyness and better-knowingness.

The answer to that question is that I would rather see people acting nicely towards such small things as spelling and grammar errors rather than being rude and destroying the thread. I dont really care about WHAT you are...but I rather care about your impolite manners.

Quick reply to Thomas Anderson:

I kinda agree. But why would someone respond to the poster in such a impolite (and later rude) way instead of just ignoring it and send that person a private message instead of ruining the thread? I had no idea laziness was that bad a crime on a messageboard. Besides..i thought the message was very clear.

And thats done now. A seperate discussion under this category. Thanks to Iceman tho for being the main reason why the thread got locked.

If you did get the chance to respond and then I locked the post, they could say the same thing. It has nothing to do with who gets the last word. It is all a matter of timing. :)

We're already having a discussion on this in another thread now.

You think it's rude to point out when someone is being lazy - I think it's lazy for a person to post like that in the first place.

Eventho it's not that important for me to get the last word, that may be the case with other people. It was bad timing yeah - you all must be in the US or being awake all night. The time difference caught up there :-)

Yep, seems so. I just dont agree with that last part. The poster claimed herself/himself that it was a bad habit of hers/his, so it doesnt necessarily mean its her/him being lazy.

(hm i better find out if the poster is female or male huh? uh oh...im lazy...im gonna get attacked now) ;-)

WWW was invented in 1992. In 1993 it was in "general" use in some Universities and some companies. Since you claim to have used it "since the beginning", you must've used it from 1993 onwards, when you were 12 years old (depending on your birthday, of course).

I tried the WWW first time in 1994 and by 1995 I "surfed the net" almost on a weekly bases with a modem. I made my first HTML pages back then as well, although I opened my first site in 1997.

Yes, I prefer well written posts about anything, because I won't read the badly written ones. And if everyone prefers well written posts, why doesn't everyone write those as well?

As we should. But it's still no reason to type illegible posts.

Yes, as long as they write like 2nd graders, I will act like they are 2nd graders. As soon as they write like civilized people do, I will treat them accordingly. It's my way and I will continue acting like that, like it or not. For example, I've never thought you were an idiot, because you can write English even if you're a Dane. If you and I can do it, why can't the natives?

I consider it very impolite not to write legible posts on a public message board. This isn't a cell phone. And just to let you know, if I get a txt spk SMS message on my phone, I won't answer it or I'll let the person who sent it know they should try again with better language. You call it impolite, I don't.

Actually, the main reason was you, along with R2D2-something with the name calling. If you didn't notice, the thread didn't get locked because I pointed out the horrible language in the first post.

Ice

Your writing may be good, but your math skills certainly isnt. Whats 29 minus 14? It certainly isnt 12. So much for 2nd graders huh (from your comment below)

Well you read that one post so what your saying here isnt exactly 100% true. And your question doesnt make sense btw. Its like saying that everyone prefers homemade cooking, but it doesnt mean that everyone knows how to cook it.

Have you ever heard of dyslectic people? Or people who was unlucky not to get a proper education? I certainly dont like your way, if it involves talking down to anyone whos either dyslectic or simply not good at grammar. I find it very arrogant that your generalizing this much and even hints that if their posts doesnt live up to your high standards, they must not be civilized people.

Well maybe you should switch to option 1 instead of using option 2 on the messageboard, thus revealing yourself as some kinda forumcop. The difference is that on the messageboard, hundreds or thousands may read the post...until the thread goes off-topic.

Well, me and R2D2 wouldnt even have started posting if you havent joined in to convert the thread into an off-topic one. So I certainly think that statement of yours is debatable. The thread got locked because it was off-topic because we kept debating your grammar-issues. A debate that wouldnt have existed, had you ignored the post or written a message to the poster in a private message.

No-one here is suggesting that only people with English degrees can post here - and no-one would judge a person who was dyslexic or whose English wasn't very good, if they were obviously trying their best. I'd applaud such a person in fact, for being brave enough to post despite knowing that their level of English wasn't great.

The point we are trying to make here is that many people, and a number on the increase, are merely sloppy and lazy. They have the ability to write in a much more compehensive manner, but they opt not to. This is not comparable to coloquial and regional dialects, but is just pure lazyness. As Ice has said again and again, the person who started this all off is a native English speaker and, according to their profile, a writer, so they have no reason not to communicate more fluently.

As for you thinking it rude of us to point this out, rather than sending perhaps a private message - well you yourself have pointed out to us something you find rude, but you did so publically and not privately, which makes your whole point somewhat flawed and hypocritical.


The bottom line here is that this is an English speaking board, with visitors from all over the world, and for many English is not their native language. I am one for whom it is my native language, yet I often struggle to read some of the txt speak - so imagine how hard it would be for a person to read when they don't understand much English to begin with, let alone pointlessly abbreviated English. It is lazy, it is thoughtless, and it is rude.

I hope your right. Icemans posts just indicates something else.

I dont disagree with you. But the person isnt breaking any rules and it seems that majority did understand the post fine enough. What Im pointing out is that messageboards arent classrooms or formal places where people are forced to use the spell- and grammarchecker. Heck, theres even a Quick Reply box for people to quickly type-in a response. A response that will most likely be typed in a hurry.


So...you two are allowed to be rude in public, but Im not allowed to make people aware of this rude problem in public? I was making a point to all the other potential english-teachers and defending the original poster. But of course it would have been easier for you guys if you had tought the poster a rude lesson without anyone noticing your impoliteness.

I actually agree with you. I just dont agree that the original post was as bad as you make it appear. And I dont agree that laziness was the reason for it. Just as I dont agree with Iceman that the poster obviously must be uncivilized and going nowhere in life. Please notice that Iceman is the one starting the insults in that thread. What would a forumuser rather see....a thread with some grammar faults or a thread with insults?

I use quick reply but manage to type coherantly. Also, as has been mentioned, there are many spell-check plugins for browsers, so there's no real excuse for not making best use of them.

Only by your own logic - you said that we were rude to point out their mistakes, but you pointed out what you claim are ours.

I just went back to look at it, and I swear I remember it being far worse than that, so perhaps it was edited by the posted before you ever saw it.


I think that he was merely using an extreme example to prove his point and get attention to it.

I think Neil is doing a very good job explaining this, but Rane's metaphores are way out there. What has home cooking to do with writing?

As to people not being fortunate enough: if you have an Internet connection, you'll also have education. It's your problem if you didn't take advantage of it. There are people here from Iran or India and they write better English than that American "writer". What does that tell you?

Dyslexia is another thing, but no one is _that_ dyslexic. Dyslexia doesn't involve abbreviated English or txt spk.

I don't jump on people who obviously can't write better, but people who do know and just don't want to.

Ice

Rane, some people you just have to ignore sometimes on some subjects. On those particular subjects they always have their heads in someone asses and have no opinion for themselves.

Next to that they think they are Jesus themselve, and could just as well be a priest how and are the kind of people who never drive 1 mile/km too fast because that's against the rule, who never will throw sometime accidently on the streets because that's against the law.

It's like constantly referring to forum file sharing policy but as soon as new download is available they are one of the first to ask for a PM.

And no matter wich law, for them its all equal, driving too hard or commiting a murder, it doesn't matter to them - its all the same.

They are the angels of God (at least they think).

About the writing, who is anyone to say how to write. Of course I don't like it myself sometimes but tough shit, ignore it. The constant comments about somebody writing not properly are way more irritating and makes the thread even more difficult to follow.
So from now on I will comment on that everytime people are commenting about writing, just to make it just has irritating as the comments itself.

Again, I've been told twice I don't write properly, but I'm not English native. At least most non-English native can communicate in a 2nd language (and most of the time a 3rd of 4th language), those English native people bashing people aren't capable of that.

As for the saints, don't worry there is no heaven or hell.

If you don't like it, why don't you do something about it. I don't believe in shutting up and taking things as they come. If you don't like something, do something about it or don't complain.


Ice

Good for you. About the spell-check plugins, do they also check grammar and linebreaks i wonder?

I think it seemed fair to defend the poster from unnecessary rudeness.

Only the poster knows, I guess. I just know that the post I read was perfectly legible.

So the question is, was an extreme public example necessary to prove his point or not? I think we'll never agree on that one ;-)

You're right. My metaphores was way out there, but please notice why I wrote the home cooking part. I think your original claim was this: "And if everyone prefers well written posts, why doesn't everyone write those as well?" - my point was that this sentence doesnt make sense at all. Everyone prefers well-written posts = Everyone has to write well-written posts? Now your again forgetting those with grammar-problems etc. I simply compared it to home cooking because that was just as much "way out there" as your claim.

I must admit, you have some strange assumptions and opinions Iceman ;-) Now suddenly a internet connection means you must have a good education? I couldnt help smiling/laughing a bit at that one, sorry. (FYI, I know of several people who has an internet connection but doesnt have a good enough education)

You keep mentioning that a "writer" should write better. It doesnt really matter if she is a writer, an astronaut, a construction worker or unemployed. Everyone cant constantly please the teachers by writing perfect posts. There are other factors involved, other than just laziness as you keep suggesting.

I'm curious if your indicating that the original posters writing is just as bad (or worse) than a dyslectics writing or not?

Yeah, we've established that. Be lazy and you have the right to bash.

I can agree with them that really badly-written posts aint good for the forum and I can even kinda agree that the poster should be informed of it. But just not in the way it happened here. A private message would have been fine, the poster could have edited his/her post and everyones happy again.

Exactly my point.

And if you've been on the net almost since it started, people would also know about the unwritten rule that one doesnt comment/bash people spelling- or grammar errors. I know for a fact that this unwritten rule even today is widely respected on the newsgroups and on most message boards. Its always a shame to find a violation of that rule on a board, we happend to attend.

If you like a good meal, you either go and pay for one or you learn to make one. You don't go to a restaurant waiting for a badly cooked meal. If you only get bad meals when you cook, then why would you cook? Catch my drift?

If you've got an internet connection it means you've got some money. If you've got some money, it means you live in a society where either you have public schools or can buy education with the money you have. Poor, uneducated people in countries where education is not available do not have internet connections. Thus, if you have internet connection, you have good enough education to be able to write properly.

You're clinging onto straws here. Maybe you should stop and think for a minute.

You can't call yourself a writer if you can't write. If you call yourself a writer and can't write a decent post on a message board then you're either a lier or not a writer at all. Any writer will tell you that because of the love of the langage, they would never write txt spk or "forget" paragraph changes or proper punctuation. And we're not talking about mistakes here but plain laziness or stupidness.

It's worse. I've read posts by dyslexics. Dyslexics know about their problem and try hard to write properly. You can't blame them for that. If you don't have dyslexia, and still write poorly, the joke's on you.

Ice

Because eating at restaurants are much more expensive for one? Your example is the same as saying "if you cant write a well-written post, pay a friend to write it for you" - and seriously...who would ever do that :)

Naa, your just assuming too much. Things arent as simple as you'd like them to be. First of all, internet connections are getting very cheap nowadays so everyone can afford them really. Secondly, some people may still live at home or together with some friends who has internet, and so on and so on. Your "logic" might have been true 10 years ago but today that logic falls apart, I think. Ive even read about big American cities getting that new Wimax connection for a very low cost.

Again, your assuming things. Its not a fact that all writers write properly, especially not in unpublished writings. I know for a fact that theres people sitting and correcting writers spelling- and grammar errors before anything gets released. Would you still have written your post, had she been listing "actor" or "unemployed" in her profile? And why is it such a big deal what ppl write in their profile? I doubt you're a man made of ice and living "Somewhere between heaven & hell", for example ;-)

You're probably right. Dyslectic ppl does try harder to write properly. However I think they focus most of their effords on the spelling part, not the grammar.

Following your wacko metaphores, that would be "if you can't type, don't come here" or "if you can't spell, get a thesarus". Or a spell checker. Or use www.merriam-webster.com. Anything, but don't post crappy posts.

Naa, your just assuming too much. Things arent as simple as you'd like them to be. First of all, internet connections are getting very cheap nowadays so everyone can afford them really. Secondly, some people may still live at home or together with some friends who has internet, and so on and so on. Your "logic" might have been true 10 years ago but today that logic falls apart, I think. Ive even read about big American cities getting that new Wimax connection for a very low cost.


If you haven't published anything, you're not a writer. I've published many articles, but I still don't consider myself as a writer. And neither should anyone else if they haven't published anything.

If you claim to be a writer, you should have a good understanding of the language. No editor will edit your text if you can't write. Would I have posted? Yes, but I wouldn't have pointed out the "profession". Now it demonstrated the point more clearly.

Dyslexics have no problem with the grammar. It's a condition where they can not "see" the words clearly. Grammar has nothing to do with it.

Ice

My "wacko" metaphores only exists based on your first claim that ppl liking well-written posts simply needs to write well-written posts to be accepted in your book. So I have no problems with you calling them wacko, since it just shows your first claim was wacko too. :)

I think you misunderstood me here. I meant that in the writers "spare time" (like on a messageboard, on emails etc.) where things arent getting published by the publisher, the writer aint forced to write perfectly english. Actually I could perfectly understand if the writer felt more free and didnt have to concentrate and focus on every tiny spelling- or grammar detail.

Ok, so we agree that nomatter if the poster was a writer or not, you would still have acted in the same way. Now that rules out the "writer" argument for now.

As far as I remember, there wasnt much wrong with the original posters spelling. There was maybe some linebreaks missing and some simple grammar errors. So this could in theory have been a dyslectic person (spending 20mins on spelling) writing the post, if it wasnt for the "writer" info in the profile. But that aside, you could have ended up being rude to a dyslectic person and that would be ok then.

I know, we're dealing with theories now but I kinda have a problem with the attitude that it must be ok to be rude to someone whose only "crime" is to write a quick post forgetting some linebreaks.

What Ice meant is that a person generally becomes a writer from a love and respect for language, and as such they would never degrade the language into txt speak, be it in their free time or not.

The only wacko thing is you putting spelling and cooking side by side. You can't do that. I played along, but since you can't seem to grasp the metaphore yourself, maybe you should try to write without them then.

As far as I remember you've never seen the original post as it was edited.

And if a person is dyslexic (yes, that's how it's spelled), if they tell me that, I'll apologize.

I don't care if you have a problem with it or not.

Ice

And I will once again say, that your claim makes just as much sense as the cooking example. That was my point. Your claim was not logic. I chose a wacko example to point that out.

I dont know if i've seen the original post or not. It doesnt say anywhere that it's been edited during the period of time I read it and until now.

Actually dyslectic is perfectly valid as well, as (according to the dictionary) its a variant of dyslexic. Why would it even be needed for a dyslectic person to inform you of that, just to avoid the rudeness?

Yeah I know that now. What a great great person you are. Please continue to insult people who doesnt live up to your standards. Just be prepared to look bad and arrogant as there will be people defending those other people.

I think the keyword here is "generally". You cant assume every writer becomes a write from the love/respect for language. Many do it because of money, fame and most luckily do it because they have a story to tell.

However I will agree tho...that I dont like the tendency in peoples use of txt/sms slang language. The worst parts of that includes using z instead of s, spelling things wrong on purpose and in modern young slang and finally..how the nerds online spell (wOOt...hez so gay etc.).

So it's arrogant for Ice to want people to speak properly, but not for you to say it's ok to type like an idiot?

Well if they don't have a love and respect for language, and are doing it purely for the money, I bet not many of them will last for very long.

Then perhaps, had you seen the original post, you'd have been on our 'side' in fact

So you're actually agreeing with us? :roll:

Ice

You're forgetting though - people who write like that are annoying, but we are the rude ones for pointing it out to them :roll:

Dont draw conclusions so fast, Thomas. Please show me where i've written "its ok to type like an idiot". But thats typical...start with the namecalling personal attacks (you're indicating the original poster was typing like an idiot).

To answer your question better: Yes, his WAY of telling a person to speak properly...was arrogant. None of this would have happend, had he simply written (in public) something like: "Could you please check your post next time before hitting the send button? Its very hard to read".

Maybe you're right. I wouldnt know :)

I have no idea how you come to that conclusion. Please read my post again? None of what I mentioned, figured in the original posters first post. Im agreeing on the tendency among people (young people mostly) , writing this way ON PURPOSE. Whos to blame, I dont know. Maybe it's the rap/hiphop culture?

d·i·ot /ˈɪdiət/ [id-ee-uht]
–noun
1. an utterly foolish or senseless person.

That's a dictionary definition. It isn't a random insult, like just calling someone a twat or a cunt, it's an observation. If a person makes a post in such a sloppy manner then it's logical to assume, unless they can prove otherwise, that they actually are, in fact, an idiot.

Read my post properly and drop the sarcasm as its wasted in this case :)

So the original poster is utterly foolish or senseless...on purpose? I dont see it.

The key part of that being 'ON PURPOSE' which you even highlighted yourself.

I'll try to re-itterate; this board has visitors whose first language is not English, and as such even well written English will be difficult for them to read. When a person intentionally starts abbreviating and using txt speak then it means that probably a lot of people here won't be able to read it easily. That means that the poster is not only being lazy, but they are being rude and thoughtless.

Why, don't you understand sarcasm? :roll:

They are showing themselves to be senseless

The original poster clearly stated afterwards that it was NOT on purpose. So I dont really see where your getting at.

Sure I do. Are you indicating im too stupid to understand sarcasm? ;-)

Everyone knows the word "idiot" is much stronger than what the dictionary claims it to be. Besides..you forgot to mention the 2nd part from the dictionary when looking up the word "idiot":

2. Psychology. a person of the lowest order in a former classification of mental retardation, having a mental age of less than three years old and an intelligence quotient under 25.

Hmm...looks like an uppercut ;-)

Well I doubt many would think "I'll post in crappy txt speak just to annoy some people" but when a person writes a message which is not up to their ability then it is very much on purpose because they are being lazy.

Just because a word has multiple meanings doesn't mean that a person using it means every single one of those. I picked the meaning relevant to make my point with.

Also, people 'know' a lot of things which are very, very much wrong. Just because something is common knowledge certainly doesn't make it true.