|
UllrsIshtar -> RE: Are The Messages Really True? (9/25/2015 6:14:54 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bhruic
In the sense of giving consideration to ones contemporaries or peers, and in the sense of having respect (unless they have demonstrated it is not warranted) for ones contemporaries or peers.
That makes more sense. We do use the word different then, because for me "respect" is something that's not granted automatically in any circumstance. A common level of consideration for others falls under the category "courtesy" for me, while respect is earned by actions that prove the person in question to be deserving of a consideration above the normative courteous one.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bhruic
And I was using disrespect in the sense of:
1: : speech or behavior which shows that you do not think someone or something is valuable, important, etc. : lack of respect
That still leaves me confused as to how you feel undervalued, or deemed to be of less of importance due to another's errors.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bhruic
High regard is but one of the definitions of respect you cited. But your argument works better if you ignore the others, I understand.
Perhaps. But I was using respect in the sense of:
2 : an act of giving particular attention : consideration
3b : the quality or state of being esteemed
I'm not ignoring the other ones. In fact I brought up 3b several time specifically by mentioning a lack of esteem. It's again apparently a difference in our perception in that esteem is something I accord to people who have shown through action to be deserving of a level over common courtesy, while you on the other hand apparently accord it as a matter of -to you- common courtesy.
As far as 2 goes, I can see how that one applies looking at it from a perspective of respect being a defacto given that one might loose, instead of a thing one gains through behavior. Though the oversight on applying it originally wan't intentionally.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bhruic
I do not expect to be revered. I expect only the minimum respect that is generally afforded to readers by writers... which is expressed by writers by the care they take in writing. When writers callously write badly, especially publicly, they pretty clearly indicate how little regard, value and respect they have for their readers.
When it is clear that a writer has little respect for me as a reader, I don't resort to a laundry list of emotional reactions... I simply do not respect them in return.
Again it's apparently a different of respect being earned vs lost. I don't consider any writer to ever "generally afford respect to readers", nor do I see how any person writing recreational on a forum would have regard, value or respect for their readers. This is different -to me- when the work in question is commercial or professional, because in such cases the reader can expect a certain standard of the work considering it's being paid to be read to enjoy or utilize in some way.
On a forum, I don't count "being read" as the goal of writing, but rather "getting one's point or purpose across so that an open dialogue might be created". As such the standards I have for commercial or professional writing are much more focused on accuracy, while with writing intended to facilitate dialogue, I'm more more interested in a free flow thought exchange.
Different goals I suppose. *shrugs*
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bhruic
minor typos and occasional spelling errors do not particularly bother me, AND I never said they did. My point was with regard to atrocious grammar of the type given as examples at the beginning of this thread.
My bad, seeing that you responded to my post and quoted me, and I had specifically stated several times that it's exactly the minor typos and errors I don't bother with, while readability is important to me, I had assumed that your post specifically related to that.
Apologizes for misinterpreting your meaning.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bhruic
That said... my personal opinion is that if one is going to do something, one should attempt to do it well. Consequently, those who clearly do not care about such things wane in my esteem.
Agreed. And agreed that writing in such a way that the writing becomes an exercise in deciphering code instead of reading does not constitute "doing something well".
As far as the rest of our disagreement goes, I think it comes down to us having different standards (and perhaps goals) we use to define what it means to write "well" on a message board.
|
|
|
|
