I am so sick, of seeing people complaining and whining about spelling errors and mistakes, and wasting perfectly good posts. People will deviate from perfectly great topics, and take down perfectly good points, by simply saying: "You have bad grammar", or "Learn punctuation."
Here's News People:
IGNORE IT!!!!! NO MATTER HOW MUCH IT BOTHERS YOU, JUST IGNORE IT!!!!! YOUR RANTING ABOUT HOW HORRIBLE A PERSON SPELLS WIL NOT CHANGE THE WORLD. PEOPLE USUALLY POST LIKE THAT, TO TYPE QUICKER, AND SHORTER.
That is the end of my rant.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:PEOPLE USUALLY POST LIKE THAT, TO TYPE QUICKER, AND SHORTER.
Correction: Lazy, ignorant people usually post like that. Otherwise, you're right on target.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
How about, instead of the large majority whose spelling and grammar is decent, the people whose spelling and grammar is painfully bad do themselves and everyone reading a favor and learn something and apply it?
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
I don't think that was so much as a rant. But more you whining and complaining about spelling errors and mistakes.
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
That too. But can you honestly say, it doesn't bother you?
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
I could say it without the comma, perhaps.
Posted by breyerchic04 (Member # 6423) on :
I think this is a nice place for English majors to play.
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reticulum: That too. But can you honestly say, it doesn't bother you?
You complaining does bother me. Other people telling other people that they have grammar problems doesn't bother me. Grammar, punctuation, captilization, and spelling are all things that we learn starting in first grade, mostly. If it hasn't been mastered by now, I have very little respect for people who don't at least try to make their posts intelligible.
Posted by cheiros do ender (Member # 8849) on :
quote:PEOPLE USUALLY POST LIKE THAT, TO TYPE QUICKER, AND SHORTER.
Well that's great for them but did you ever stop and think about how incorrect writing takes longer to read? Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
Well, I have a thing with commas, and adding them where they aren't needed. I don't do run-ons, (sp?) but just ad commas.
Posted by Advent 115 (Member # 8914) on :
Uhhhhhhh, well he may be right. But some of us try to correct our errors later.
Posted by Mr.Funny (Member # 4467) on :
Also, about threads wandering off the original topic...
They do that some times. In fact, they do that most of the time. It's the way that Hatrack is. You've chosen to come here. You can't just expect everyone to change the way they have been functioning just to fit your needs.
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
quote: I don't do run-ons, (sp?) but just ad commas.
I thought I would point out that you have only one subject in that sentence, therefore you needn't use the comma.
Edit:
Reticulum- You also used the wrong form of the word "add."
Mr. Funny- I agree. Sort of.
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
I know it takes longer to read. It is inconsiderate, to type like that, but people just make a HUGE deal out of it.
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
*glares at steve*
Oh... you're good.
Posted by Scythrop (Member # 5731) on :
One of the things I've always appreciated about Hatrack is that things like spelling, grammar and appropriate use of punctuation are regarded as important here. This sets it apart from a lot of the internet, and is no bad thing, in my opinion.
It seems to me that when you choose to involve yourself in any forum, you also choose to take on certain accepted norms of that forum; in this case the norm is to submit thoughtful, well-proofed posts.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
Umm..."WILL"
6th line, 5th word from left.
Thank you for playing.
Posted by cheiros do ender (Member # 8849) on :
So there's something wrong with complaining about someone else being inconsiderate? We don't make a huge deal out of it until people like you come back with crap like "It's easier" or "I feel lazy today." You're making a HUGE deal out of it with this thread and defending them for those very reasons.
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reticulum: *glares at steve*
Oh... you're good.
I am quite good. By the way, my name is a proper noun, so it should have been capitilized there. Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
You hold a good point Scy, but do you see the HUGE commotion people make out of simply having bad grammar?
I know THAT Steve ( ), I just did it to shave off a few seconds.
Posted by breyerchic04 (Member # 6423) on :
Only if you are easily offended or don't catch the funny.
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
quote: I know THAT Steve ( ), I just did it to shave off a few seconds.
How many seconds could it possibly shave off? All you are doing is hitting shift at the same time as "s," it is not like you have to heave a gigantic toy block with the capital form of "s," onto a table that is a number of feet above your head.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:I know it takes longer to read. It is inconsiderate, to type like that, but people just make a HUGE deal out of it.
You seem to be making a bigger deal about it than the pro-punctuation Nazis ever do.
Posted by airmanfour (Member # 6111) on :
When someone posts in bad English (and it's their native language) on a regular basis, I tend not to think of them as real people. So people correcting those that write badly are, in my book, turning puppets into real boys. And I'm cool with that. The obvious rectification, Reticulum, of your problem would be to ignore the helpful corrections.
Posted by Scythrop (Member # 5731) on :
Reticulum -
I'd have to say that as a general rule, I don't think people do make an overly big fuss; when the general standard of the forum is to carefully proof your posts, then I have to say that I don't see anything wrong with pointing it out.
I'd also add, however, that there are polite and impolite ways of doing so, and that generally it's my experience that here at Hatrack people will tend towards the polite, unless they feel that the poster concerned isn't making any effort to address the issue.
That, of course, is just my 0.02c
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
I am not saying it isn't helpful, or shouldn't be done (now), I am just saying people make a GIGANTIC deal out of it.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
I'm afraid there's more to it than that. The thing is, if you irritate people on a totally separate front they're less likely to give you a pass on the grammar. Just human nature.
In your particular case, I'd guess it's a combination of refusing to conform to the norms around here (established years ago and adhered to by, well, everyone who stays around), arrogance, and general pandering.
------
But, on the grammar/spelling end of things, every time we have this discussion we get some people complaining that their grammar attracts more posts than their content. And they're probably right. You have to understand, though, that on a forum your words are all there is. There's no voice, no tone, and no gestures. Just your words. If you don't show enough respect for what you're saying to give it a cursory glance to remove any glaring typos or grammatical errors I can't see why anyone else should, either.
If someone comes up to you in real life and yells something obscure, are you going to seriously take the time to cross examine them and see what it was they meant to say? Or are you going to give them a strange look and continue on your merry way?
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reticulum: I am saying not it isn't helpful, or shouldn't be done (now), I am just saying people make a GIGANTIC deal out of it.
Was it just me? Or did that post make no sense whatsoever?
Edit: I see now. There is a double negative. Tricky things those double negatives.
Posted by cheiros do ender (Member # 8849) on :
Reticulum - No, we don't. You are and you're being a hypocrite.
Posted by airmanfour (Member # 6111) on :
Not so much GIGANTIC, as gigantic. Maybe even huge, but nowhere near HUGE.
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
Yes, yes I am. I have been swayed through the power of logic. My only complaint now, is that people make a HUGE deal of it, including my self. ( )
Posted by aiua (Member # 7825) on :
Thanks, El. I was trying to make that respect point too but was having a hard time finding appropriate words.
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
El JT de Spang had a magnificent point.
Posted by Celaeno (Member # 8562) on :
It's painful to read poorly constructed sentences. If you can't present your arguments in a coherent fashion, it only shows how little respect you have for your interlocutors, the English language, and, in a way, your own argument.
It should be a big deal. I'm not saying that people should be rude about it, but I do think it's perfectly acceptable to point out mistakes in the hopes that the offender won't keep making them out of ignorance. It's beneficial to both parties.
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
It was a pointy point.
Posted by MandyM (Member # 8375) on :
So, Reticulum, if you can learn the rules for run on sentences, why can't you learn them for commas? It is not that hard.
What bothers me is not the occasional typo or misplaced punctuation but the lack of caring about the language when posting. I love to see a post with lots of mistakes that asks forgiveness for the errors since the poster is from another country and still learning the language. That means they see the value in proper English but don't yet know all the rules. Posting huge grammatical, spelling, and punctuation errors even though you have spoken the language your entire life is inexcusable. Everyone makes mistakes and that is OK. What is not OK is to think there is nothing wrong with your mistakes. I don’t think this is just an age thing either. I have 7th grade students who are meticulous about being correct in their writing and that is so refreshing!
You, Reticulum, even admit that making mistakes is inconsiderate but you think it is OK to “shave off a few seconds.” Are you kidding? How long does it take to hit the shift key? And you have the audacity to complain about the complainers? You are making a big deal out of nothing. If someone is bothered enough by a mistake to say something about it, then it was probably a big mistake. Get over it or learn from it.
Posted by cheiros do ender (Member # 8849) on :
quote:If someone comes up to you in real life and yells something obscure, are you going to seriously take the time to cross examine them and see what it was they meant to say? Or are you going to give them a strange look and continue on your merry way?
Nice rhyme.
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
quote: You, Reticulum, even admit that making mistakes is inconsiderate but you think it is OK to “shave off a few seconds.” Are you kidding? How long does it take to hit the shift key?
Aha, I made that same point!
Posted by prolixshore (Member # 4496) on :
I always figured that if you wanted people to take what you are saying seriously, you should say it in a manner that is as close to correct as possible. This doesn't mean that you can't have any mistakes or can't use any slang. It simply means that if every third word is spelled incorrectly and you have no idea what proper punctuation means, then you are a child and should not be taken seriously. Perhaps that view of things is impolite or unfair, but if I can't read your post without wondering how you managed to pass 6th grade english, I don't really care what you have to say.
--ApostleRadio
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
Ah but Steve, it was the pointiest point.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
The thing I do with commas which may help you out is I try taking out the clause and seeing if the sentence makes sense without it. If it does, then the clause needs to be set off with commas. If it doesn't then it may not need to be. This isn't always the case, such as in this and the last two sentences. But I still find it helps me.
For example:
quote: But, on the grammar/spelling end of things, every time we have this discussion we get some people complaining that their grammar attracts more posts than their content
This is a sentence from my previous post. Notice that the sentence makes perfect sense if you remove the bolded part. That tells you it needs to be set off by commas. You can also remove the first word without affecting the clarity, so the same applies for that. You may have noticed that a number of the sentences in this post have one comma in the middle of them. Furthermore, the comma comes right before the second half of the sentence. You can tell it's the second half of the sentence because it starts with an article (but, then, furthermore, so). There's a name for that type of sentence, but for the life of me I can't remember it. When in doubt about commas, remember less is more.
[edit] I'm also positive that Jon Boy or someone else english-nerdy enough can find a half dozen comma errors in this post.
Posted by cheiros do ender (Member # 8849) on :
Reticulum. Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
Thanks guys. You really helped, El.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reticulum: Im must KoM, this is a great thread. I myself, would deny it, since I really don't have a religion, but gradually let science explain everything. All (in my very controversial opinion, that none should heed) religion does, is give people a false beliefe so that they aren't afraid their entire lives. It also causes hatred, predjudice and war. It have its good sides though.
Reticulum,
I have a question for you. Given that you are capable of producing a post that is both clear, grammatically correct (in the main) and (nearly) devoid of spelling errors, what is the advantage you get from posting things like the above?
How much time is it saving you to do a slip-shod job as opposed to producing something that is well written?
Also, do you realize that the time savings for you translates into a major hassle for anyone who might want to read your post? As in the above quotation, I gave up after the 3rd word and didn't bother reading. dkw read it and gave me a translation, otherwise I wouldn't have ever known what it was you were wanting to say. I just quit on you because I find it too frustrating to try to decipher the gibberish and mentally correct all the mistakes and divine the meaning buried behind it all.
If people do puzzle through it, they probably each spend 10x longer figuring it out than you ever saved in sloppily generating it. In a sense, it's rude of you to think your posts are worth that effort on everyone else's part when you aren't willing to make that effort yourself.
It's as if you are telling us: IGNORE ME, I'M NOT WORTH YOUR TIME. While at the same time getting upset with people who don't develop a fine appreciation for the subtle wit and kernels of wisdom you bestow.
Posted by Scythrop (Member # 5731) on :
It's probably also worth considering that the hyper-abbreviated, typo ridden style of posting which people generally object to here originally developed through a sort of need to get 'stream of conciousness' thinking down into chat forums such as AIM as fast as possible.
Given that one of Hatrack's oldest principles has always been that it is a forum for reasoned argument and discussion, I suspect that most people are unlikely to give 'high speed' style posting much credence, because it suggests a lack of thoughtful consideration on the part of the poster.
In correcting these sort of errors, generally I feel that people are trying to encourage thoughful debate, rather than just posting whatever comes into your head.
Edit to add: As ever, Bob beats me to my point, and makes it in a more erudite fashion than I could manage Posted by cheiros do ender (Member # 8849) on :
Can someone please explain to me how to use a semicolon properly?
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
Well Bob, now you are just picking on me. Me? I concede that I hva been proven completely wrong, inside 50 minutes. Thank you everyone.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
Reticulum, happy to help.
cheiros, I mainly use semicolons for joining two sentences into one; it's the only punctuation mark which allows this. It prevents comma splices.
Posted by Scythrop (Member # 5731) on :
No problems. And for what it's worth, I write for a living and my editor is constantly removing unnecessary comas from my work. Contantly.
Edit: To remove an unnecessary coma. See? Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
I hate commas.
Posted by cheiros do ender (Member # 8849) on :
quote: I concede that I hva been proven completely wrong, inside 50 minutes.
Give us more credit than that. By my count you were proven wrong in just 31 minutes.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
quote:Well Bob, now you are just picking on me. Me? I concede that I hva been proven completely wrong, inside 50 minutes. Thank you everyone.
My work here is done.
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
Naw cheiros. I was proven COMPLETETLY wrong, in 51, as to my response and conceding.
Posted by cheiros do ender (Member # 8849) on :
So El, there reason you didn't use a full stop was because the second part was elaborating on the first part; but other than that they ran just like two different sentences would?
Edited for semicolon goodness. Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
quote:Originally posted by cheiros do ender: So El, there reason you didn't use a full stop was because the second part was elaborating on the first part, but other than that they ran just like two different sentences would?
Right between (part, but) would be great for a semicolon.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
In general, people only get on other's case (besides to needle them in a friendly manner) when somebody isn't even trying to use correct capitalization, punctuation, or spelling. Nobody expects posts to be perfect.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
I do it when the to independent thoughts are related; otherwise I just make them separate sentences. The semicolon is the halfway point between a comma and a period (or a full stop, to you). But I never bothered to memorize all the rules, exceptions, names of all the parts of speech, or any of that other stuff. I just write sentences the way I think they should look.
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
Yes, that is true, Porteiro.
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
One thing I love about Hatrack is that I don't feel compelled to be a grammar nazi very often. Most people here take their words very seriously, so they go to the effort of writing clearly.
Writing sloppily in order to save a little time is like foregoing grooming in order to get to work a little earlier in the morning. Sure, you might get there before everyone else, but everyone is going to stay away from you because you stink and have bad breath. Better to take a little more time to make yourself presentable, methinks.
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reticulum:
quote:Originally posted by cheiros do ender: So El, there reason you didn't use a full stop was because the second part was elaborating on the first part, but other than that they ran just like two different sentences would?
Right between (part, but) would be great for a semicolon.
No it wouldn't.
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
Yes it would.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
I leave all further grammar questions to Jon Boy, as he's far more qualified than I to answer them. And I'm watching the West Wing.
Posted by cheiros do ender (Member # 8849) on :
Google-fu time!
Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scythrop: Edit: To remove an unnecessary coma. See?
You were in a coma? Glad you're now okay. Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
psst, Reticulum, you're arguing with a guy who has been known to correct the people who write the style guides.
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
Uhhh, then I give up. Jon Boy ia right.
Posted by cheiros do ender (Member # 8849) on :
As you can see, it's a dead heat.
Posted by imogen (Member # 5485) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scythrop: No problems. And for what it's worth, I write for a living and my editor is constantly removing unnecessary comas from my work. Contantly.
quote: my editor is constantly removing unnecessary comas from my work
Maybe that is the problem with my boss! Someone did not remove his coma and that's why he acts so brain dead.
Glad you've finally seen the light, R.
Posted by Scythrop (Member # 5731) on :
I'd try to convince you all that 'coma' is in fact the correct Australian spelling of 'comma', except for the fact that we've just established that there are too many of us here for me to get away with it.
See, *this* is why I need an editor.
*writes on blackboard*
Comma, Comma, Comma, Comma, Comma...
Posted by clod (Member # 9084) on :
quote:I hate commas.
I hear ya pal. I hate conjunctions and their "on again/off again" relationship with the commas. Indeed, I lose patience with the whole lot of them - those "rules".
Posted by Xaposert (Member # 1612) on :
Rejecting an otherwise excellent post because of grammar errors is a ridiculously shallow way to judge someone's writing. It falls right along with judging people by their choice of shoes or hairstyle, not hiring someone because you don't like their handshake, or refusing to read a book just because it has a spaceship on the cover. Would you spit on a Picasso because you don't like the frame around it? I hope not, but why is making fun of a post that includes grammatical errors any better?
It is good to use good grammar because you can't escape having to deal with people who judge by trivial things like grammar, hairstyle, and handshaking ability, but that's absolutely no excuse to fall to their level, and use the same poor judgement yourself. You hurt yourself if you do so, because it makes it quite difficult to see why unpolished diamonds are better than error-free junk.
Contrary to what Tom claimed earlier, lazy and ignorant people do NOT usually use poor grammar. There are a great many lazy and ignorant people who write well, and a great many intelligent, hard-working people who don't know how to write well, or don't consider grammar a priority (and yes, not considering grammar a priority is quite different from being lazy). The notion that you can figure out how correct someone is based on their grammatical skills is flat out incorrect. And why would we think otherwise? You don't have to be smart to learn good grammar. And you certainly don't have to be wise to know how to write well. Why would we think there'd be a strong correlation between the two?
To those who suggest the forum should have a standard of high grammar, I'd ask why? The purpose of this place is discussion. It is not a linguistic fashion show. Grammar should not matter unless it interferes with discussion. And if bad writing makes discussion more difficult, I agree that that is a problem. But only rarely is this the case. Missing commas, misspelled words, run-on sentences - these things should not prevent you from understanding what the author is saying. If someone truly does find reading such things painful, they are the one with issues, not the author. A good reader looks past these elements to what is actually being said beneath the style. A good author does hope to avoid stylisic and grammar errors, but that doesn't make it any less rude of the reader to point them out, mock them, or reject the whole post on account of bad grammar.
Errors, though bad, are not unacceptable - especially in an online forum. People should not be spending a large amount of time editing posts. And if they are not good writers, they don't have to wait until they become good writers to post something here. They simply need to be capable of quality discussion, and making good points in a readable fashion. If someone is intentionally using bad grammar to frustrate us, that's one thing. But to attack someone just because they don't know all the grammar rules - that's shameful. We have a responsibility to treat other members of this forum better than that.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
I'm with Bob -- I tend not to read posts that are hard to read.
Posts with horrible grammar, capitalization, spelling, etc. are hard to read.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
Tres...
read the first line of my post in which I pointed out the fallacy about "saving time." You'll note that I start by noting that Reticulum is capable of generating text that is clear, grammatically within reasonable tolerances, and generallyl free from spelling errors.
Given that this IS the case, your entire argument is specious.
Rant on, brother, but you are barking up the wrong tree entirely. At least as far as I'm concerned.
Words, sentences and paragraphs are to written communication the structure and undergirding of meaning. They are not a mere shell (as implied by your clothing analogy). They are more like the skeleton, without which a human being would be unrecognizable.
Nice rant, though.
Posted by Scythrop (Member # 5731) on :
I don't actually disagree with you Xap, however I think the point I was trying to make earlier is a valid one;
quote:Originally posted by Xaposert:
To those who suggest the forum should have a standard of high grammar, I'd ask why? The purpose of this place is discussion.
I'd say precisely because the purpose of this place is discussion is why we need clarity of expression. To have anything else can lead to ambiguity, mis-interpretation and hurtfulness. Good use of grammar is, in my opinion, one (but by no means the only) key way of achieving this clarity..
quote:But to attack someone just because they don't know all the grammar rules - that's shameful. We have a responsibility to treat other members of this forum better than that.
I agree completely with this, but don't think this is incompatible with asking someone to make their posts more readable, and politely assisting them to do this, if they don't yet have the skills to do so themselves.
Edit: *Garn* Bob, will you stop doing that?
Posted by cheiros do ender (Member # 8849) on :
Stop twisting our words, Xaposert. We're not saying they're lazy by nature, we're saying they're lazy as posters, and they've, almost all of them, admitted this. Ignorance is another thing. No-one is accusing the ignorant (like my lack of knowledge in punctuation and vocabulary) of being not worth our time. And no-one, no-one, is attacking anyone, except those that bite back with "I feel lazy... I don't have time to write properly.... I don't have to write properly; it's just a forum, etc."
Posted by MandyM (Member # 8375) on :
Scythrop, really? I had no idea that is the correct spelling in Australia! I apologize for my ignorance. I was only teasing anyway since I was really just thinking of an idiot boss I have who really should take a look at this thread. Some teachers I work with keep threatening to use his memos and emails as warm-up exercises with the kids. His writing is pretty scary for a man in his position. I was certainly not trying to offend. Anyone certainly pick apart my posts and find errors, even with commas. Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scythrop:
I'd try to convince you all that 'coma' is in fact the correct Australian spelling of 'comma', except for the fact that we've just established that there are too many of us here for me to get away with it.
Because if you were the only Strine you'd be able to get away with it?
Have you been here long?
Posted by MandyM (Member # 8375) on :
Xaposert, I disagree too and for some of the same reasons.
When a post is filled with too many errors and the poster thinks that those errors are too much hassle to fix, it is a slap to the reader. It is like saying the reader has to do all the work to decipher what is written rather than the writer taking that responsibility. The reader can better focus on what is said if the writer puts effort into HOW it is said.
So I do judge people, not by their ability to write (I do teach children after all) but by the care they take in their writing. If care is not taken in the writing, why should I take care in the reading?
quote:not considering grammar a priority is quite different from being lazy
How? People who don't consider grammar a priority are lazy or disrespectful, either of themselves or their readers. It is a form of being rude. Asking why we have a high standards of good grammar is like asking why do we have good manners? Why don't we just fart and pick our noses in public? We all know that everyone has snot and gas, so why does it matter where we release it? Farting in public is rude, just as using poor grammar on a writer's forum is rude, especially when it matter to many people here.
Posted by Scythrop (Member # 5731) on :
Rivka - just saying I'd give it a try, that's all. I wouldn't actually expect it to succeed
And Mandy, nope, it's spelled exactly the same way here. I'm just a goose. Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
Xaposert, as I stated out earlier, writing clearly is a way of showing that something is important to you. If someone can't take the time to make themselves understood, why should I take the time to understand?
Grammar is not as superficial as you claim; poor grammar and punctuation can seriously impair readability. Furthermore, if grammar is so superficial and unimportant to you, then why did you bother to write clearly? It seems like you want to have it both ways; you want to righteously denounce an evil and oppressive grammarocracy, but then you take the effort to make sure that you don't incur that regime's wrath.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Spam, spam, spam, spam, spam.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
Are you actually advertising your thread?
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
quote:Originally posted by Advent 115: I would like to welcome everyone to the Giants Shadow Bar (a game). Where you can drink til' you can't type strait or talk til' you can't talk no more. But just remember to enjoy yourself.
Speaking of being disrespectful to readers . . .
Posted by Advent 115 (Member # 8914) on :
Sort of. But this is the only night I will ever do it. Sorry, but I just wanted to get the word out quickly. Posted by Xaposert (Member # 1612) on :
quote:Words, sentences and paragraphs are to written communication the structure and undergirding of meaning. They are not a mere shell (as implied by your clothing analogy). They are more like the skeleton, without which a human being would be unrecognizable.
Ideas, concepts, and reasoning are the undergirding of meaning. Grammar IS a shell, and it mainly just makes those ideas and concepts flow more smoothly from one person to the next.
IF someone is writing with such bad grammar that the meaning is truly unrecognizable, I agree that grammar is important. But very rarely does anyone post something on Hatrack that is actually unreadable. Typically when complaints about grammar arise, I can read whatever is intended with ease, just as quickly as I would had there been no mistakes. It is not signficantly harder for me to understand "i think cheney shouldnt go hunting" than it is to understand "I think Cheney should not go hunting". (And that would be a particularly severe example of a grammatically lazy post - most on Hatrack are much less obvious errors.)
I don't think this is about poor communication. It's about details that don't need to be all that important.
quote:And no-one, no-one, is attacking anyone, except those that bite back with "I feel lazy... I don't have time to write properly.... I don't have to write properly; it's just a forum, etc."
I've seen numerous complaints about grammar on this forum, and most of them are one-liner attacks on the original author. Very rarely are they written in a polite, constructive fashion.
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
quote:Originally posted by Xaposert: It is not signficantly harder for me to understand "i think cheney shouldnt go hunting" than it is to understand "I think Cheney should not go hunting". (And that would be a particularly severe example of a grammatically lazy post - most on Hatrack are much less obvious errors.)
A couple of points: (1) there were no grammatical errors in that sentence, but rather capitalization and punctuation errors; and (2) that is absolutely NOT a particularly severe example of a grammatically lazy post.
Posted by MandyM (Member # 8375) on :
quote: But very rarely does anyone post something on Hatrack that is actually unreadable.
quote:Originally posted by Jon Boy: If someone can't take the time to make themselves understood, why should I take the time to understand?
You know -- the reality is that some folks are good at expressing themselves -- be it verbally or by using the written word.
And some folks really struggle with communication.
It behooves us to be a wee bit patient. Especially if our communication skills are patently better.
One would hope that "better" communication skills also includes "better" listening skills. Which can be, and usually is, a whole lot of work.
One of the interesting quirks to me about the whole tech revolution in communication, is how people try to write the way they speak.
And clearly, some of the examples I've seen on forums, internet, and in e-mails demonstrate one of the reasons why we have so much discord and disharmony in the world.
People don't really know how to communicate very well. (I'm no exception.) Whether verbal or written. And they certainly may not take the time to listen very closely or reflectively -- which is a far larger portion of adequate communication than the response we give to what we have heard (or read). Or not heard, or read. Or refuse to hear or read.
Posted by Xaposert (Member # 1612) on :
quote:1st and 6th post
Well, the long conversation is pretty hard to read... but that's almost always the case when you are copying long IM conversations into a post. (Truthfully, if you do that and it is pages long, I probably won't read it.) But the rest of the 1st post and the entire 6th post is pretty easy to understand.
I will say, though... contrary to what I said earlier, all the grammar complaints I see on that thread are polite and civil. I don't have a problem with that (politely requesting better grammar, that is).
Posted by MandyM (Member # 8375) on :
Being patient is one thing if someone is making an effort or has not mastered the language. I think we are referring more to those who don't understand the value of trying to use proper English. You have mistakes in your post, as I am sure I do, but it is not difficult to read what you are posting. Some posts are painful to read and I think those are the ones we are talking about.
Also I tend to nitpick mistakes if someone is flaming others. It is just a passive agressive thing. I should stop now.
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
How do you pronounce "Xaposert"?
Posted by clod (Member # 9084) on :
"exhausto-spert"?
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
"Zap-o-sert"?
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
You're absolutely right, Shan; my statement was a little extreme. I didn't mean that we should completely brush someone off if they're not totally clear. However, if someone makes no effort to be understood, they shouldn't be surprised if some people don't bother to read what they write.
To be honest, I don't proofread what I write, and I don't expect others to. Since none of this is getting ready to go to press, clear writing is sufficient. But if someone points a problem with my writing, or if I see one myself, I will fix it. I don't think it's too much to ask that people fix any problems in their writing that inhibit clarity.
Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
I just want to know who deleted their *&%^$ post, knocking my thoughtful, beautifully expressed post to the bottom of page two, when it started on the top of page 3.
I've half a mind to cut-n-paste the whole dang thing again on this page.
*grrrr*
Edit to add: at Jon Boy
Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reticulum: How do you pronounce "Xaposert"?
I always read it as "Tresopax."
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
I think no matter what, someone should be given a first chance. If they're new, then people should kindly inform them. However if they have been here as long as me, (4 months) then they SHOULD definitely know, and not do so. Only then should they be ignored, and only if they do this continuously, and not totally ignored, but minorly, or partially.
Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
Hmmmm. I am thankful that there have been some people in my life that have been willing to sit quietly with me while I stammer, falter, think slowly, think too quickly and have to re-think and then restate . . . in short, to bear with my jumbled version of expression/communication, and keep sifting until they find the pearl in the sand.
Posted by Carrie (Member # 394) on :
quote:I always read it as "Tresopax."
Funny how that works...
I forget how many people have said this, but I feel the need to agree: I do not often take the time to read through posts when they're incomprehensible. I find that enough when I grade papers - I don't need to spend my free, voluntarily-spent time wading through slogs of bad grammar and sloppy punctuation. If I see something that I can understand, I want to read it more. Finite, end of story.
Is sloppy posting a component of laziness? Probably. Disrespect? I doubt it. We're all here (I hope) because we want to be and because we respect the ideas on which this forum exists. It can't change to accomodate either the lazy or the, well, Nazi.
I have also never seen a grammar correction request post that was rude, unless the original post was rude or inflammatory in some way, or if the original were made in jest, in which case all bets are off.
I suggest everyone get over it and move on. Let's all try to be a bit more constructive in our criticisms and our responses to it.
(Wow, in reading that, I just realized how conciliatory and hand-holdy [which is not a word, I understand] I sound. Oh well.)
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
I agree Carrie, you hit the hammer right on the head...
or wait a second....
I love idioms. Posted by clod (Member # 9084) on :
And, I love idiots.
What can be more fun than to make fun? Making fun, much like making love, requires an intimate idiocy, n'est pas?
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
quote:Originally posted by clod: And, I love idiots.
I believe you put the comma in the wrong place. I think it should read:
And I, love idiots.
Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
Why not:
And I love, idiots.
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
That works too, so far as I know. It would only work if you responding to someone else who said they loved they loved something else. This applies to mine also, but not the first one; so far as I know.
Posted by Scythrop (Member # 5731) on :
Love idiots, Andi?
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
I suppose that works. is the person's nme Andi?
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shan: Hmmmm. I am thankful that there have been some people in my life that have been willing to sit quietly with me while I stammer, falter, think slowly, think too quickly and have to re-think and then restate . . . in short, to bear with my jumbled version of expression/communication, and keep sifting until they find the pearl in the sand.
Sure, in conversation. We all um and er when it comes to talking. But when writing, you have all the time you want.
Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
I think the crucial part is the tone of voice accompanying each way of phrasing these sentences, no?
*grin*
Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
Well, KOM -- even with having all the time in the world, there are still those that really are not very competent in the world of clear written discourse.
And, I think part of good listening in this unique world of web-based communications, is giving just as much consideration to the written word . . . which really is substituting from good 'ole down-home porch front evening chats, really . . .
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
That is the crucial part, Shan. Though I must say, that is trivial. BTW, you just hit 4600 posts.
Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
*gasp!!!*
You are a fiend!
Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
4600?
Oh dear . . . must be time to change to a new screen name for a while . . .
Posted by cheiros do ender (Member # 8849) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shan: Hmmmm. I am thankful that there have been some people in my life that have been willing to sit quietly with me while I stammer, falter, think slowly, think too quickly and have to re-think and then restate . . . in short, to bear with my jumbled version of expression/communication, and keep sifting until they find the pearl in the sand.
Now that's a beautifully expressed post.
Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
Why, thank you, cheiros.
The post is not half as beautiful as the people who have spent the time listening, looking for, and then helping me to see those pearls.
I think we all need a little of that in our life.
*smile*
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
My my... aren't we the philosophical one?
Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
Nope. Not at all.
Just expanding my post count.
Fear not. I am soon heading to slumberland where I will dream philosophy rather than spout it.
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
Well then, someone is conceded, and cares about self image. That person is Shan.
I myself, look scruffy, but not too scruffy. HJC; Scruffy looking Nerf Herder.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
quote:How do you pronounce "Xaposert"?
Funny, whenever I read it, it sounds like new chalk on a chalk board.
Here's another take on the issue, where OSC actually chimed in.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Who the hell do you think you are again?
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
I am hu...man?
Posted by clod (Member # 9084) on :
'specially that crotchety Jiminey the PoMo. I'll tell you a story about him when I find the time.
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
42?
Posted by clod (Member # 9084) on :
que?
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
So long and thanks for all the fish...
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
Scythrop: you need to edit to add a necessary "s." Posted by Scythrop (Member # 5731) on :
Erso -
I know, as my lovely wife pointed out, except if I edit and correct now, it'll make her post below mine nonsensical, so I decided I'd just let it go.
so, 'contantly' it is.
I guess this is Davidson's Law at it's finest Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
quote:I know, as my lovely wife pointed out, except if I edit and correct now, it'll make her post below mine nonsensical, so I decided I'd just let it go.
so, 'contantly' it is.
I missed her post, and I demand that you ignore the woman you've committed to spending the rest of your life loving and obey me, an internet stranger.
Now.
Posted by starLisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reticulum: That is the end of my rant.
Why do I suspect that's not entirely true?
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
quote:Originally posted by Advent: Sort of. But this is the only night I will ever do it. Sorry, but I just wanted to get the word out quickly.
You don't need to get the word out. Everyone sees every thread on the front page. If people aren't posting, it's not because we missed it and just need a reminder to go check it out. More likely it's that it's a thread that's thoroughly uninteresting to everyone who's currently on the board. Just because no one's posting doesn't mean it didn't get read.
And furthermore, I think double posting is similar to running a red light: The only times it's alright is in the middle of the night (when no one's around) or in an emergency.
You triple posted three times yesterday (that I saw). Just something to think about.
Posted by odouls268 (Member # 2145) on :
quote: I believe you put the comma in the wrong place. I think it should read:
And I, love idiots.
I believe it should be "whom"
Posted by Xaposert (Member # 1612) on :
From FlyingCow's link, OSC's take on the issue:
quote:You already heard my feelings about this, and quoted them. Only pinheads get upset about informality online.
We make typos. Sometimes they're funny and we get teased about them. But this is conversation, NOT formal essay writing.
Because the standards are high here people naturally try to look respectable. That's a good thing, but one requiring neither enforcement nor encouragement.
At the same time, people here are (or should be) tolerant of those whose spelling skills are not well-developed, those for whom English is a second language, or those whose native English is a dialect or subset of English with different rules. From what I've seen, that tolerance is pretty well-developed and widespread, and I appreciate it. I'd hate to have anyone think that their lack of mastery of grammar rules disqualified them from taking part as full members of this community.
Especially since I generally find that the people who are most fussy about grammar rules are usually the very ones who have no idea what they're talking about - the ones who have embraced pinheaded, invented "rules" like not ending sentences with prepositions, etc. I've been a copy editor - and a very good one. I see EVERY grammar mistake. And I invariably find them in the writings of people who presume to criticize the grammar of others.
NOBODY speaks or writes without error. You get into a sentence and forgot how you began, so you end it differently (and ungrammatically). So what? In conversation, we forgive things like that all the time. All I was saying was, online postings are treated like a branch of oral conversation - we are informal. We tolerate error as long as sense is clear and the intention is communication.
Let none feel unwelcome because they do not measure up to some arbitrary ruleset on formal language usage! EVERYBODY speaks the grammar of their own dialect PERFECTLY. (And yes, I am deliberately using the plural possessive THEIR with the formerly singular but now felt-as-plural "everybody" because it's more convenient and is long established in common usage.)
Please note the part about how grammar requires "neither enforcement nor encouragement", and the distinction between an online conversation and the requirements for formal essay writing.
quote:How do you pronounce "Xaposert"?
Your guess is as good as mine.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
Well then, tres, I guess you can keep on preaching to anyone who'll listen about how unimportant good grammar is. Using perfect grammar.
Posted by Xaposert (Member # 1612) on :
Heh... I wish I could use perfect grammar, but I only wrote three sentences in that last post and I suspect there's mistakes even in that.
For instance, does the comma go inside or outside quotations? I can never remember that, but I think it looks better outside.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
I can't either, but I've never seen any mistake that obscure or trivial corrected.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
I think it's polite to tell someone, once or twice, that their grammar, spelling, or punctuation makes reading their post so difficult that you won't bother to do so.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
I will repeat, once again, my comments were directed at Reticulum who, as you can see if you look at the very first post in this thread, is capable of grammatical utterance. Tres, you're just being contrary again, for the fun of it.
If it's not "allowed" to point out that one person's time savings is costing others even more time in mentally deciphering the post, I guess I'll wait to hear from our host or moderators about that.
I agree with OSC that it's a conversation, that the rules are relaxed, and that we ought to be extra patient with people whose skills are weaker, for whom English is a second language, or those who come from a place where the rules of English are different. Does any of that apply in this specific case?
I pointed out to Reticulum that I, personally, quit reading his posts (and those of others) when I can't understand them. I quoted an example where I quit after the 3rd word, in his case. It may not be "friendly" but it is constructive in that I can point to exactly what MY personal reaction was and why. It's not rude to do so. If OSC doesn't like, I'm sure someone from his team will let me know. Reticulum wasn't happy with my criticism. I would never have even mentioned it were it not for him making this thread in which to rant about it. I felt like he lacked a certain perspective on why he might be getting a reaction other than the one he expected.
Patience is great. I think you'll find me extremely silent on most things I find to be simple errors of communication. But if someone asks, or complains...have they not opened the subject up for discussion? If they'd wanted a private space, they have other means of communicating that, right? A BB is inherently FOR discussion. An invitation to discuss the topic is what the act of starting a thread equates to. Even if the first post is a rant.
Finally, mistakes in grammar can and do change the sense of an utterance. If that's not the undergirding of meaning, in the STRUCTURAL sense in which I used the term (i.e., literally), then I suppose you'll have to educate me in the proper use of terminology too, if you feel up to it. Your analogy literally falls apart, though. To call grammar a mere "shell" when it can change absolutely the sense of an utterance is just ridiculous -- as in worthy of ridicule. It is obviously false, and thus undermines the remainder of your argument.
Your take on it leaves sentences without structure, period. And that is not a "shell" issue at all. A boneless human wearing t-shirt (the shell) may well still be human, but recognizing and interacting with that pile of protoplasm would be nigh on impossible for anyone without specialized training and a great deal of preparation.
And my assertion is that if we all have to study "Grammar-sub-reticulum" and "Grammar-sub-person x" and "grammar-sub-person y" in order to have a discussion, then there will never be discussions. There will be long, laborious reading sessions followed by endless attempts at clarification.
In some situations, that is worth the effort. As when we are at the brink of disaster and trying to avert war with some group we barely understand.
Your assertion is that it ALWAYS worth the effort, and that I am wrong to quit reading a post I don't understand. That I should struggle with until I master each person's idiosyncratic form of communication. And that the burden is all on me to make their meaning shine through.
I think you are being unrealistic and contrarian.
Posted by Xaposert (Member # 1612) on :
quote:Tres, you're just being contrary again, for the fun of it.
Being contrary is not often all that fun. I'm being contrary on this issue because I dislike it when new and/or young people with perfectly valid things to say are driven away from the forum because they are attacked over their grammar. And because I dislike it, in general, when people capable of great substance are rejected over issues of detail.
quote:Your assertion is that it ALWAYS worth the effort, and that I am wrong to quit reading a post I don't understand. That I should struggle with until I master each person's idiosyncratic form of communication. And that the burden is all on me to make their meaning shine through.
No, my assertion is that it is often worth the effort, that I don't think it is that much effort, and that the burden is partly on the reader and partly on the author to make communication work (rather than all on the author). Even so, if you don't want to make that effort, I don't have a problem if you skip over that post or that thread. That's your call. I don't even have a problem if you politely mention the error. I just have a problem if you decide attack the author for their bad grammar, and distract the thread from whatever the author intended it to be about. That frustrates the author (who could very well leave over that if they are new) as well as those of us who do think it is worth the effort and are trying to take part in the thread.
[ February 15, 2006, 10:25 AM: Message edited by: Xaposert ]
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
I like FG's link.
It has the original codification of Davidson's Law:
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: Anyone who posts to correct the grammar of someone else is required to have at least error in the body of his or her own post.
Posted by aiua (Member # 7825) on :
Might I suggest the Google Toolbar, at least for spelling? It's quite easy to use and often clears up some..embarrassing spelling mistakes. Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
We are guests in Mr. Card's living room. Mr. Card hates when his guests mess up the room with commas strewn about willy-nilly and odd spellings and grammatical constructions splattered all over the walls.
I'm guessing that he saves that sort of mayhem for the bedroom, and only when he is feeling particularly naughty.
Posted by MandyM (Member # 8375) on :
Posted by R. Ann Dryden (Member # 8186) on :
I'd like to say something here, and because this is the Internet I'm sure it will be taken wrong. Why not? Every other post I make is, I'm sure this won't be the exception. Anyway.
On the OSC side of the forum, someone posted a quite lovely anecdote of how he's bought and given away literally dozens of copies of Ender's Game. Then one day he sees a stranger reading one and notices it is a copy he bought.
Now, that's a cool story. But his original post was incoherent, with almost all punctuation missing, whole words missing, incomplete thoughts, and a plethora of other errors.
The first sentence in his post was that he felt OSC had changed him to an 'A' student.
I felt almost nauseated trying to read through the mess to get to the meat of what he said. So I posted, gently I thought, that he might want to proofread his post because it didn't look like the work of an 'A' student. I also said I thought what he had to say was great.
I was jumped on, big time. One person said he'd spill coffee on my shoes and pee on my car if he knew where I lived. Lots of people said they agreed with him and I was a horribly stuck up, arrogant person, with no respect for the feelings of others.
What?
I later noticed the original poster said his right arm was injured and he was on medication at the time of his post. So I replied that I was sorry about his arm and hoped it got better. (In future, the poster said, he wouldn't post while on drugs. Sounds like a good idea to me.)
I was still jumped on.
Episodes like that make me question the wisdom of belonging to Hatrack, which is sad because I really respect OSC, and I wanted to stay.
My grammar isn't perfect either. I've never said it was. But I hope that my sentences are usually readable, and I had no idea that suggesting to someone else that they take the time to make sure their posts make sense, at least, was inappropriate.
Posted by Katarain (Member # 6659) on :
(I think the other side of the forum is a completely different world...)
Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
Well, it seems a bit younger and starry-eyed.
Posted by Katarain (Member # 6659) on :
Yes, with a very different population. I'll see regulars on this side over there sometimes, but they feel more like parents stopping by a children's party occassionally to keep order or to answer a few questions.
Not that they're all kids over there...
Posted by Historian (Member # 8858) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reticulum: I am so sick, of seeing people complaining and whining about spelling errors and mistakes, and wasting perfectly good posts.
An expression or utterance marked by a deliberate contrast between apparent and intended meaning.
oh, wait.
d00d, ur post was teh 733t. u r0x0r !!111111oneoneone111!!!
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote: I was still jumped on.
In my opinion, R. Ann, you probably should have been.
Posted by R. Ann Dryden (Member # 8186) on :
Why thank you Tom. That sure makes me feel better. Care to elucidate?
Posted by camus (Member # 8052) on :
In R. Ann's initial post, I probably would have taken out the first sentence. Otherwise it was fine. What was not necessary was the other people agreeing with how bad his grammar was. It only takes one person to point out the mistake. Anything beyond that (like two additional posts made immediately afterward saying the same thing) is quite unnecessary. Criticism isn't always easy to take. Beating it to death with a condescending tone doesn't make it easier.
Posted by R. Ann Dryden (Member # 8186) on :
See that's just it. There was no condescending tone. I was really trying to be polite. I was quite shocked to see the reactions the next time I signed on.
In person I have a lot of friends and no enemies. I'm good at communicating. Online, no matter how clearly I try to convey something, people read into it various emotions that never even occurred to me.
Posted by R. Ann Dryden (Member # 8186) on :
quote:It only takes one person to point out the mistake. Anything beyond that (like two additional posts made immediately afterward saying the same thing) is quite unnecessary. Criticism isn't always easy to take. Beating it to death with a condescending tone doesn't make it easier.
And yet, it was okay for twenty people to harangue me for my error? Smacks of a double standard to me.
Posted by MandyM (Member # 8375) on :
The whole point is that a few errors are ok; even lots of errors are ok. But when it becomes so difficult to read that the meaning is lost, there is a problem. Why shouldn't that problem be addressed in a respectful manner without someone being called arrogant?
R.Ann, I don't think you were out of line at all.
Posted by camus (Member # 8052) on :
quote:See that's just it. There was no condescending tone. I was really trying to be polite. I was quite shocked to see the reactions the next time I signed on.
I didn't mean to imply that you had the condescending tone. Rather, I was referring to some of the other statements made by others. I think the only reason it turned into a big argument is because other people felt they needed to add more to what you had already said.
quote:And yet, it was okay for twenty people to harangue me for my error?
No, that is not okay, just as it was not okay for several people to emphasize his poor grammar before he even had a chance to correct or defend himself after your post.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
quote:quote: Being contrary is not often all that fun. I'm being contrary on this issue because I dislike it when new and/or young people with perfectly valid things to say are driven away from the forum because they are attacked over their grammar. And because I dislike it, in general, when people capable of great substance are rejected over issues of detail.
Reticulum is not being driven away. Also, since I responded in a thread ABOUT grammar, I think the point is that this IS the substance of the discussion...here.
quote: No, my assertion is that it is often worth the effort, that I don't think it is that much effort, and that the burden is partly on the reader and partly on the author to make communication work (rather than all on the author). Even so, if you don't want to make that effort, I don't have a problem if you skip over that post or that thread. That's your call. I don't even have a problem if you politely mention the error. I just have a problem if you decide attack the author for their bad grammar, and distract the thread from whatever the author intended it to be about. That frustrates the author (who could very well leave over that if they are new) as well as those of us who do think it is worth the effort and are trying to take part in the thread.
Please show me where I have attacked the author, distracted this (or any) thread from what the author intended it to be about, or how talking about grammar in a thread specifically about grammar has detracted from your enjoyment of it.
Since you posted this on page 2:
quote:Rejecting an otherwise excellent post because of grammar errors is a ridiculously shallow way to judge someone's writing. It falls right along with judging people by their choice of shoes or hairstyle, not hiring someone because you don't like their handshake, or refusing to read a book just because it has a spaceship on the cover. Would you spit on a Picasso because you don't like the frame around it? I hope not, but why is making fun of a post that includes grammatical errors any better?
It is good to use good grammar because you can't escape having to deal with people who judge by trivial things like grammar, hairstyle, and handshaking ability, but that's absolutely no excuse to fall to their level, and use the same poor judgement yourself. You hurt yourself if you do so, because it makes it quite difficult to see why unpolished diamonds are better than error-free junk.
And it seemed to directly address my central point so soon after I made it, I've been laboring under the assumption that you felt I was doing the things you say are wrong-headed.
Something tells me now that you may have been speaking in a more generalized fashion, and perhaps had incidents from other threads in mind when you adopted the tone that you did.
Is that the case? Maybe you'd care to present a few specific examples of where you felt a person was deliberately dismissed over grammar in an "otherwise excellent" post.
I'd like to understand what your operating definition of "ridiculously shallow" behavior is in this regard.
Personally, I think you're being vague, over-generalizing, and taking the aggressively contrary position for no good reason. Perhaps to see just how far you can carry the argument on nothing but rhetorical skill...
I don't know what to make of you, sometimes, but you sure adopted a rather accusatory tactic here and I, for one, want to see you back it up with specifics.
Especially if you are aiming even a piece of that off-hand criticism at me.
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
Tresopax, no one here is asking for people to write each post like a formal essay. I think the problem is that people are using the term "grammar" rather imprecisely. You seem to be thinking of a set of fussy little rules that you have to observe in order to impress someone, while others seem to be talking about things more fundamental to interpreting meaning, like spelling, punctuation, and sentence structure.
And even on those subjects, I think the overwhelming majority of Hatrackers cut people a lot of slack. The problem I see pointed out the most is the lack of paragraph breaks, which can greatly impair readability. No one is asking anyone else to bust out The Chicago Manual of Style and copy edit everything they right; they're just asking for basic readability.
Edit: Oops. There was another page I hadn't read yet.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:I was still jumped on.
In my opinion, R. Ann, you probably should have been.
Wow, Tom. I have seen insulting condescension from you before, but this may be a new low.
I think R. Ann's post in that thread was completely reasonable and polite. (And I apologize for not having posted to say so.)
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
"We are guests in Mr. Card's living room."
And OSC has expressed his displeasure with those who derail conversations to attack his guests for grammar and spelling.
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
And as Bob just said, show us where the attacks were.
Posted by Xaposert (Member # 1612) on :
Sorry, Bob... I didn't have anything you did specificially in mind. I was referring to:
"people complaining and whining about spelling errors and mistakes, and wasting perfectly good posts. People will deviate from perfectly great topics, and take down perfectly good points, by simply saying: 'You have bad grammar', or 'Learn punctuation.'"
That's the general case the Reticulum laid out in his first post, and I've seen many situations like that on Hatrack. I was refering to those cases in general, and not to whatever specifically Reticulum did to make people complain about him.
This thread, being discussed above, is one instance. In it a student who has only posted 65 times offers a error-filled opening post in which he describes how he loved EG and a story about how he gave away copies of the book to people. Here are two comments from that thread:
quote:Your spelling, grammar and typing skills don't match those of an A student.
quote:
Sorry, Locke, I got about a third of the way through your post and gave up.
I think both of these are fairly insulting - especially the laughing smiley. In fact, three out of the first four responses are about his grammar, rather than the substance of his post. This transforms the thread into an argument about grammar rather than about the story the author intended to convey. If I were a relatively new Hatracker, getting a response like that to what was intended as a very friendly thread, I would think twice about coming back.
He posts again in this thread, in which he mentioned editing a chapter of a book, to which he gets one congrats and one response like this:
quote:Gyah. I do hope you weren't editing it for actual grammar and spelling.
This is basically just a one-liner attack. Not surprisingly, he responds:
quote:this board used to be fun to come to lol...
There's also this thread where you attempted to make a joke about a new poster's grammar, but ended up offending cheiros do ender when more people piled on his friend to complain about grammar, rather than answer the question he gave. Once again, I think getting three or four responses like that after your very first post would give a very bad impression of the forum.
One more instance... In this thread Geekazoid tries to honestly sum up his thoughts on religion, and instead is met only with this response:
quote:Gyah. If you're going to be on the right side of the argument, would you please clean up your spelling? You're making atheists look bad.
I've seen this sort of thing numerous times. Occassionally it will be a polite comment. Often, however, it is a joke at the author's expense - sometimes repeated by two, three, four, or more other Hatrackers. Often it distracts the whole thread from the original intent of the post, even if that post is intending to say something important. And often the "offender" is a newcomer who may or may not come back after being treated in that fashion.
Posted by JennaDean (Member # 8816) on :
Well, R. Ann, I didn't say anything at the time but I was a little rubbed the wrong way by your post in the other thread. I normally like your posts very much, so I was a bit surprised. Since you honestly seem confused about what felt bad about it, I'll tell you.
quote:Your spelling, grammar and typing skills don't match those of an A student.
Great information, that's wonderful about the books, but on this forum communication skills count. You may want to proofread your post.
What bothered me was that your first sentence did not address the topic of the post at all; instead it sounded like a teacher grading an essay. Granted, you are a teacher, but you're not his teacher. Without commenting on his topic, you first jumped on his grammar and gave him a failing grade. To me, it didn't feel like a "polite" response to sandwich one positive comment on the thread topic in between two criticisms - not of the topic, but of the grammar.
If it were me, and it was my intention to respond politely, I would have responded to the topic first. Then, if I felt it bad enough to warrant it, I might say something like your second sentence.
Many of the later posts did take it farther and make it worse, though.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
Thanks for the clarification, Tres.
For what it's worth, I did cringe when I saw that one of mine that you linked. That was not nice at all. And certainly not constructive.
I should've chosen a different tactic in particular post (as, in all honesty, I believe it needed to be). But in reality, I probably thought I was cutting the person some slack versus what I might've said.
And that's not nice of me, at all.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
I tend to give the "other side" of this forum a pass on most things, because they tend to be younger, enthusiastic, and unfamiliar with the "culture" of the site. For many of those users, this is the first time they've EVER posted a Card-related note of any kind, and they've come here expressly to gush about how much they love his work, to share their enthusiasm about his oeuvre and try to meet up with other fans who're discovering the same joys.
I don't usually try to rain on their parades. I don't post, for example, that I found Homecoming kind of dull in a thread called "OMG Just read HC!" posted by somebody named OSCRawks. And I won't correct OSCRawks' grammar or spelling in any post I make in that thread, if I post in it at all. I will, in short, permit him the time and space he needs to get used to the site.
He may discover that people do not post in response to his enthusiastic, self-indulgent threads as much as he'd like. He may find that the people who've been on the forum longer may not be as interested in discussing the political elements of the Shadow series as he might have expected. And at that point, he may ask about it (even obliquely), and I'll tell him why. Sometimes he'll post something completely unrelated to being a Card fanboy, like "OMG George Bush sucks," and I'll post in THOSE threads (when I feel like it) because he's now attempting to engage the community as a community and not just a place to share OSC info.
And it's around that time that I'll start feeling comfortable enough with his presence -- that I think he's become emotionally invested enough in this place to care -- to begin dropping little hints about how to better fit in (which, after all, are what these grammar threads ultimately are, except for the ones that're blatantly patronizing.)
Telling a raw newbie who's gushing about how much he likes Card and how eagerly he's been promoting Card's books to others that his grammar is terrible is, IMO, a pretty harsh way to welcome him to Hatrack. OSC and I have had our differences -- and some words -- but I can't imagine being confrontational to newbies, particularly fanboys, until they've had some time to decide whether or not they want to belong in the first place.
Note that I don't apply this logic to people whose first posts are, say, "Here are twenty of my poems! What do you think?" These people are clearly inviting commentary and seeking entry into the larger, non-OSC-related community. But gushing fanboys get a free pass, early on.
Posted by Anti-Chris (Member # 4452) on :
I learn grammar rules and spelling, just to ignore them at my convienence. Makes me feel like a big man.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:I learn grammar rules and spelling, just to ignore them at my convienence.
Like, um, just then? Posted by Anti-Chris (Member # 4452) on :
Presicely
Posted by BandoCommando (Member # 7746) on :
The following is my $0.02:
People often make a judgement as to a person's intelligence based on how clearly they communicate the ideas inside their head. Unfortunately, there are many bright and insightful people out there, who for whatever reason (ignorant, lazy, or apathetic), who do not use correct grammar. There also happen to be a lot of really stupid people out there who also communicate their (stupid) ideas with poor grammar and spelling. However, there aren't very many people that use correct grammar and spelling who are mentally dim.
Thus, if you use poor grammar/spelling, you might be smart, but you might be dumb.
Conversely, if you have an extended vocabulary, accurate spelling, and good knowledge of the construction of phrases, then the chances are very high that you are a smart person.
If you want to look smart, write well. If you want others to have to guess, then do whatever you want.
Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
I'm so confused, I need a scorecard to keep up with the multiple screen names.
I thought BandoCommando WAS Reticulum. Or is it Advent who is Reticulum?
Reticulum, who ARE you?
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
R. Ann, I agree with JennaDean concerning your post on the other side. I thought it was out of character for you, and whether or not you thought you were being condescending that's how it came off.
The responses to you were way over the top, though. And I agree with you (obviously) about the importance of clear writing. But I thought your execution and timing could have been much better.
Posted by cheiros do ender (Member # 8849) on :
Thing is, I never did get why Ms. Dryden was made the central target (bud?) of that assault.
This is her apparently obscene comment:
quote:Your spelling, grammar and typing skills don't match those of an A student.
And this is SteveRogers comment immediately following:
quote:I'm glad you said it, rather than I. Because I feel that I've become quite a bother, constantly bugging people about that. Mine isn't that great either, but his is worse. And so are a lot of other people's posts. And it bothers me.
In short, thank you for saving me the trouble of having to correct someone again.
And that is the one that was originally quoted by Pee-master Jiminy and used to justify his attack. So how did it all turn against Ms. Dryden like it did? Posted by cheiros do ender (Member # 8849) on :
Tante, trust me, Reticulum only uses one username. Get over it.
Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
I trust you. I'm over it. Thanks for your support.
(Or is that you're support?) Posted by Pinky (Member # 9161) on :
quote:I thought I would point out that you have only one subject in that sentence, therefore you needn't use the comma.
So there ARE rules?
I wonder about that everytime I write in English. Somehow, nobody really bothers to teach that.
I can only name some major rules: - when you have a relative clause that is actually not necessary for the understanding. For example: "My husband, who is the funniest person I've ever met, lives next door." (In contrast to: "The man who happens to be my husband lives next door.") Or vice versa?
- when there is a subject in both of the clauses (as mentioned above)
- when you list something
- after expressions you use to connect sentences or clauses logically, for example "in addition to XY", "however" etc.
- between "if"-clauses...
Is there anything else important to know? If so, please tell me!
However, most of the time, I'm just guessing or put the commas in the way I'd do it in German. But I never know whether I'm right or not. I mean, aren't there any corrections by the people who correct my essays and stuff, because there is nothing wrong (with the commas), or because they just don't care?
Then again, tenses are a much bigger problem... ( )
(edit: I just found the link...)
[ February 15, 2006, 07:32 PM: Message edited by: Pinky ]
Posted by BandoCommando (Member # 7746) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tante Shvester: I'm so confused, I need a scorecard to keep up with the multiple screen names.
I thought BandoCommando WAS Reticulum. Or is it Advent who is Reticulum?
Reticulum, who ARE you?
Oy! No, no, no!
Bando Commando is NOT in any way, shape, or form Reticulum. Reticulum and Bando Commando happen to know each other in real life. Bando Commando happened to, in the course of his job, introduce Reticulum to the Hatrack forums, unwittingly unleashing a devastating torrent of non-sensical posts onto the world. Bando Commando will cease referring to himself in the third person as of this moment.
And I have no clue who the heck Advent is - some friend of Reticulum's, I assume.
Posted by cheiros do ender (Member # 8849) on :
Lol, thirdperson.
(Wrote that in just such a way as to confuse someone. Someone...)
Posted by BandoCommando (Member # 7746) on :
And who is cheiros and how does *HE* know that Reticulum uses only one username?
I'm confused.
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
I thought that Reticulum, Advent, and cheiros were all the same person...
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Man, after reading that thread, I'm glad I don't post on that side of the river. The anger that erupted, and the uncontained vitriol of a few of the posters, was reminiscent of some of the folks who ended up being banned on this side of the river.
That said, I agree with Tom that newbies get a bit of a pass. Granted, if a new poster is posting all over the place, taking up half the main page with new threads, and can't string a sentence together, I'm going to try to catch their ear and comment (as happened a few years back, which I alluded to in this thread that I linked earlier.
Overall, though, I don't take issue with people whose grammar is poor. Mostly, I just ignore them altogether, as I find it's not worth my time to fight through their words. Exceptions are obviously made for those who are not native speakers.
I am very much of the mind that if you don't care to make your words presentable, then I don't care to read them. Just like on a job interview - if you don't care to look presentable, the employer likely won't care to hire you. A resume written in crayon on a greasy napkin doesn't really fly, no matter how good it may be.
So, rather than pointing out mistakes, I ignore them. The small mistakes I just glance over, and the posts with major syntax/structure problems I just skip.
Posted by R. Ann Dryden (Member # 8186) on :
Tom, this time the thanks is not being fascetious (sp? See, I'm not perfect either). I appreciate your explanation and in hindsight, that's probably the safest course of action.
I can see now how my post was mis-interpreted. I'd like to apologise again. I hate rubbing people the wrong way and I'm not a big fan of confrontation. Sometimes that makes me a sheep instead of a shepherd, but it's part of who I am. So that's why I was so shoked. Anyway, I honestly didn't mean anything negative, and I still think Locke had a good story to tell.
So, I'm sorry to everyone I offended. I'll try to be more careful in future.
Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
quote:Originally posted by Locke2525: i edited it,.
I don't know how many of you noticed that comment. When R Ann made her first post on that thread, the first post still had not yet been edited and was an even worse mess than it is now. It was near incomprehensible.
Now that it's been edited, it's at least mostly readable and much easier to understand, even without standard capilization, punctuation, spelling, and the like.
Does that change anyone's opinions on R Ann's post?
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
And, R. Ann, I want to clarify too that I don't think you deserved the actual reception you received in that thread. A LOT of n00bs went overboard -- on both sides -- and your moderate tone was clearly misinterpreted and ignored.
Posted by cheiros do ender (Member # 8849) on :
quote:Originally posted by SteveRogers: I thought that Reticulum, Advent, and cheiros were all the same person...
Good, I can use that against you. Posted by Chreese Sroup (Member # 8248) on :
I will continue to post how I want to post. If I wish to correct grammar, I will. I wouldn't try to tell people what to do; when you haven't been here long enough to have a say in what people do.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
quote:I wouldn't try to tell people what to do; when you haven't been here long enough to have a say in what people do.
So who has been here long enough to have a say in what people do? Anyone?
I think a little bit of courtesy to the other readers of the forum is not such a bad thing. It takes me twice as long now to type posts, because of the neuropathy in my fingertips. I also try to edit carefully, because with the numbness in my fingers my typing easily gets off track.
I don't catch every mistake, I'm sure I still send out posts with misspellings and bad grammar. But I do my best to make sure it's readable and clear to my fellow jatraqueros. Why? Because it's polite. And because I actually want to be understood.
I don't expect perfection, but I do appreciate people taking at least a little bit of time to read over their posts and make sure they are clear. If we all did at least that much - read it over one time before posting - then I think 90% of errors would be caught and corrected. Seems like there is a rush sometimes, to get your comments out there first. It would be better, I think, to take an extra moment and make sure your comment is understood as well.
Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
I try to use correct spelling and grammar because I feel embarrassed if I am caught in a mistake.
It is quite a burden to be worshipped as perfect by all of you.
Posted by Chreese Sroup (Member # 8248) on :
Belle: How about those you know on the forum. Especially, when they ask you for help.
I tried something like this several years ago with a "Fix Hatrack" thread. I learned that the only people that really listen to you or converse with you about it are the ones you have come to know from posting or chatting with them.
I'm basically saying don't use blanket statements for everyone, and only try to influence those that you know, or those that you converse with, rather than trying to mold everyone to what you want them to be.
Honestly, I used to be quite the arrogant fresh meat around here 3-4 years ago. Maybe what I'm really trying to say is newer people should lurk a bit more.
Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
quote:Originally posted by Chreese Sroup: newer people should lurk a bit more.
Oops. I guess I broke that little guideline.
Big time.
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
How so?
And ah, yes. I am NOT Bando, or Cheiros, or Advent. I really don't where you people get these ideas, but maybe since so many people seemed to think so, I guess it I was sort of unique, but since these recent posts I guess not.
So I AM NOT Bando, Cheiros, or Advent. That, or I'm a Schizo.
Posted by BandoCommando (Member # 7746) on :
I'm a habitual lurker. I almost never post.
*proceeds to lurk through other threads*
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
Follows behind, then scares. HA!
Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reticulum: How so?
Because in the six months that I've been on Hatrack, I've racked up over 6100 posts. Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
No, no, no. You have TOO much free time. Not even school? Family? Friends?
Walks away in dissapointment...
Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
Ha! I work full-time, and then some, 6 days a week. I am the primary caregiver for my severely handicapped husband (he is completely paralysed, unable to speak above a whisper, and is dependant on a ventilator to breathe). I take care of my teen-aged son, the house, shopping, errands, groceries, and, oh yeah, lately my freeloading brother-in-law.
I have NO free time. I barely sleep. I DO have a pathological addiction to Hatrack, however.
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
Wow, that seems pretty sad. You are just like my mom; always buying groceries, and shopping, and taking of 5 kids. 1 graduated,and no father; alone. And yet, she isn't the fondest of computers. Other then that, you guys are very similar.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
The really staggering thing is that in the last two months Tante has slowed down significantly.
Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
I took up crochet. And I can't hook and post at the same time. But all my friends, family, and colleages have nice scarves, my house and Mom's house are fitted out with Afghans. The blankets. Not the Persians.
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
Crocheting is REALLY hard. For me at least. Anyone else watch the History Channel? I love it. It's the best channel EVER!!!
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:nd I can't hook and post at the same time.
Where's the OOC thread when you really need it.
Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
OOC?
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Out of context.
Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: Where's the OOC thread when you really need it.
Right here! Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
Ohhhh, I see now. Thanks!
Posted by cheiros do ender (Member # 8849) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reticulum: How so?
And ah, yes. I am NOT Bando, or Cheiros, or Advent. I really don't where you people get these ideas, but maybe since so many people seemed to think so, I guess it I was sort of unique, but since these recent posts I guess not.
So I AM NOT Bando, Cheiros, or Advent. That, or I'm a Schizo.
No, Reticulum, Bando snd Advent are all me. Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Is that a confession?
If so, why wait four months to fess up? Heck, why do it in the first place?
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Because he didn't see the thread until now. Posted by James Tiberius Kirk (Member # 2832) on :
*head explodes*
--j_k
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
Sounds like a confession. Quick, toss him in the loony bin. I'll get the tranquilizers.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reticulum: I am so sick, of seeing people complaining and whining about spelling errors and mistakes, and wasting perfectly good posts. People will deviate from perfectly great topics, and take down perfectly good points, by simply saying: "You have bad grammar", or "Learn punctuation."
Here's News People:
IGNORE IT!!!!! NO MATTER HOW MUCH IT BOTHERS YOU, JUST IGNORE IT!!!!! YOUR RANTING ABOUT HOW HORRIBLE A PERSON SPELLS WIL NOT CHANGE THE WORLD. PEOPLE USUALLY POST LIKE THAT, TO TYPE QUICKER, AND SHORTER.
That is the end of my rant.
Who the hell are you?
Oh yeah......
Nobody I care to listen to.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Kwea, this thread was revived. It's from February.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Just noticed that....but I still don't particularly care for his tone there, regardless of how old it is.
I THOUGHT I had read this before.
Keep in mind that unless I can't stand to read a post I don't comment on most grammar mistakes, in part because my typing skill aren't very good, or at least not on par with my writing skills.
But I dislike having people ORDER me to stop caring if I can read a post, and order me to "get over" something.
Kwea
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Well, since Reticulum has posted only four times this month (and all in coherent English, it seems), I don't think you have much to worry about.
Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
Rivka, are you stalking Reticulum posts?
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Huh?
No, I was curious, so I checked. It's easy enough to do.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
I am sic tire o peoeples sayingae tat ve is using bah Angish, bekuz.
U allz nead to shut the pi holm andjusut daealaYT with sjmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmjmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
<Edited so the screen wouldn't foul up. --PJ>
[ July 13, 2006, 01:42 AM: Message edited by: Papa Janitor ]
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
I am not the grammar police, but some things even I have a hard time reading.
It works both ways....if he doesn't like people bitching about grammar, he can just ignore it.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
PJ, you totally ruined my point! I hope your ver happy.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
But can you honestly say, it doesn't bother you? ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Glad you're now okay. ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Group Hug]](graemlins/grouphug.gif)
![[Kiss]](graemlins/kiss.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Evil Laugh]](graemlins/evillaugh.gif)
![[Taunt]](graemlins/taunt.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)