New Rule: Acceptable format for posted dialogue (suggestion)

can i point out that not only do we have alot of members for whom english is a second language but spelling error's arnt always something that can be helped.

Would we REALLY want to demonise someone who is simply dislexic because they have a disability?

What a stupid idea

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Asguard, get a spell checker! English seems like your 4th language!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

oh for christ sake avatar, you have known me long enough to know its not something i can help

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

If we're taking this seriously, and sciforums is a quasi user oriented forum, then there should appeal against the filter. I,e asguard's case. But we run into the problem of proof and exceptions....blah de blah..

heres an idea, why don't we use our ignore lists as always.

 

As I was saying, it shouldn't be draconian, and named a few exceptions (I also included the fact that you occasionally make spelling errors, but it didn't detract from your entries )
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1810935&postcount=54

Somone else mentioned the "software filter" (like a vbulletin plugin) which wasn't what I was referring to at all. I simply meant appending a new rule to the list under the "new members please read" listing. Just a little section saying "we have a moratorium on newspeak" and describing what was acceptable/unacceptable.

This isn't really targeted at BG specifically, it's just that users show up all the time with weird posting styles (newspeak/phonetic/all-caps, etc) and people tend to harass them. It's just that she is the current "it", so she makes a great case in point.
Hmmm----I'll give it some more thought

 

Would censorship by any other name smell as sweetly?

Language evolves just like the speakers of it.

 

Censorship is limiting what a person can or can not say.
This proposed rule says "say whatever they want, but say it normally" -- I mean, unless you consider someone telling someone else to "stop mumbling" to be censorship.

 

But that's just mocking the afflicted!

 

Actually telling someone to 'stop mumbling' is not making a rule and creating some enforcement process. One person is reacting to another. To define mumbling in this context will be a very tricky and complicated process. As it is now, it seems like posters do say 'stop mumbling' to certain people.

 

No, they are afflicting the mockers:
(I had to say that, sorry)

 

Ok - if it serves as a bad analogy, think of "bubble lettering". You remember that from grade school right? Well....maybe not if you didn't grow up using English alphabetical characters......

Bubble letters were fun for kids passing notes back and forth between friends. They could make little "eyeballs" out of the letter "O", or whatever other kind of amusing modification they wanted to include. Of course, they would write normally if they were turning in homework or writing some sort of paper because the teacher wouldn't accept it.

Bubble lettering is not in itself it's own form of dialect, or significant to the "limits of a person's ability to write". It was simply a commonly used stylized form of text.
Ideologically, it's the same as cellphone-speak/LOL-cat phoneticism/all-caps/l33t-speak/whatever.

 

You left one out.

The dyslectic may find this one difficult.

 

wot about when we're like a bit fick?

 

What a freakshow.. :bugeye:

 

No, just, No

 

LOL- Will this be deleted ? I wonder...

 

Suddenly you got a backbone, Bubby ?

Shaddap and make with the Sieg Heil for the nice Gestapo like you always do !

 

I should have alpha tagged this thread, although I don't think it works outside the physics subforum :grumble:

....at any rate, I was pondering the distinction between what people were willing to put up with, and what they can't stand.
The problem with a rule like this is it might alienate someone like "duendy"
http://www.sciforums.com/search.php?searchid=2086428
I see here that people continued to have discussions with this person (on topic) even though their posting style was far from standard - but it wasn't newspeak. Was duendy from the Carribean? I kept expecting to see "I and I" written in there somewhere.....

at any rate, maybe the rule should limit itself to the outlaw of newspeak specifically, and define it as "cellular text message styled jargon, overuse of phoneticism, overuse of leetspeak, overuse of all caps" -- those are the only ones I can think of right off, I think there's others.
"Overuse" could be defined as "used as the primary posting style".




BTW -- I'm posting this for the sake of conjecture since Plazma views it as censorship.

 

OK (bumping thread)

How about instead of posting this as an official rule, how about as just a "recommendation". I thinks this at least deserves a place within the list.

 

Well, recommendation is better choice. If the rule for dialogue is just recommended, the climate for discussion is better.

Forced rules build a box where the discussion is stuck soon.