RE: Judging someone online by the quality of their communication

RE: Judging someone online by the quality of their communication (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

boytoyroy -> RE: Judging someone online by the quality of their communication (1/3/2007 4:12:55 PM)
This thread reminds me of the foolhardiness of the presidents " no child left behind " deal. Some people, myself and others ,are just not cut out for, nor do they have the aptitude for " book learning" . many of these people function very well in the outside " spoken" world. you would never know how badly they spell or punctuate by the way they speak! Personaly, my quest for higher education was derailed by one incident with one very ignorant 5th grade teacher !

SweetDommes -> RE: Judging someone online by the quality of their communication (1/3/2007 4:18:55 PM)
Not being cut out for book learning doesn't mean that you can't learn the basics of spelling and grammar - you seem to have them down pretty well, so what exactly are you complaining about here?

julietsierra -> RE: Judging someone online by the quality of their communication (1/3/2007 4:21:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: boytoyroy Personaly, my quest for higher education was derailed by one incident with one very ignorant 5th grade teacher ! All it takes is one. But I'm reminded of something my grandfather said - always a HUGE supporter of higher education even though he never went further than the 8th grade. "There are more teachers out there son than there are teachers." My father was a teacher. He married my mother who was a teacher. And my grandfather made darn sure that they kept in mind that there were many ways to learn - not all of them according the techniques of Horace Mann et al. When I want to step up on my high educated horse, I remember my grandfather - a genius in his own right - just not an educated genius. juliet

boytoyroy -> RE: Judging someone online by the quality of their communication (1/3/2007 4:28:08 PM)
The " basics" of spelling and grammar? Sorry i didnt think there was anything basic about any of it! Julliette , ( not to change the subject but ,you have awesome legs , by the way ! LOL) ,there are many teachers, but when your in the 5th grade , your pretty much stuck with the one they give you!

thetammyjo -> RE: Judging someone online by the quality of their communication (1/3/2007 4:31:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cjenny I see a huge difference between ESL, dylexia etc and just being lazy. There are a few posters here that I don't spend much time translating because it is pretty obvious they are not even trying to use a spell checker and they write at a nearly unintelligible level. A few words spelled incorrectly are not a big deal, but a post filled with them are a sign of laziness to me. It only takes moments to spell check, if in doubt compose it elsewhere..proofread.. then copy/paste here. Just a note that if someone honestly has dyslexia it can be very difficult to use a spell checker or a dictionary. If I don't know how the word is spelled it is mostly because the sounds don't match what is in my brain, so looking at various ways to spell something can be very confusing and frustrating. You end up either asking some next to you (my husband in the evening or my slave some days) or you just try to use a different word that might not mean what you want or you choose what looks like the best option. Or you just memorize as much spellings as you can and cry when you run into multiple ways to spell the same word. In my field the differences between pronunciation of words from British to American to other nationalities can confuse the heck out of my brain -- which is why I'm not a classicists but I historian. I spend a lot of time trying to read lips too to make up for the sounds I hear that simply do not match up to letters in my brain.

julietsierra -> RE: Judging someone online by the quality of their communication (1/3/2007 4:34:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: boytoyroy The " basics" of spelling and grammar? Sorry i didnt think there was anything basic about any of it! Julliette , ( not to change the subject but ,you have awesome legs , by the way ! LOL) ,there are many teachers, but when your in the 5th grade , your pretty much stuck with the one they give you! I'm agreeing with you. My grandfather's quote meant that just because someone didn't have a college degree, and didn't become a teacher, didn't mean that they didn't have something that could be of value to the next generation. It was my grandfather's warning to stay humble and realize that there's more to intelligence than just what someone learned in school. These old legs? They're just something I've had my whole life. :) Thank you very much for the compliment. juliet

cjenny -> RE: Judging someone online by the quality of their communication (1/3/2007 4:38:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thetammyjo quote: ORIGINAL: cjenny I see a huge difference between ESL, dylexia etc and just being lazy. There are a few posters here that I don't spend much time translating because it is pretty obvious they are not even trying to use a spell checker and they write at a nearly unintelligible level. A few words spelled incorrectly are not a big deal, but a post filled with them are a sign of laziness to me. It only takes moments to spell check, if in doubt compose it elsewhere..proofread.. then copy/paste here. Just a note that if someone honestly has dyslexia it can be very difficult to use a spell checker or a dictionary. If I don't know how the word is spelled it is mostly because the sounds don't match what is in my brain, so looking at various ways to spell something can be very confusing and frustrating. You end up either asking some next to you (my husband in the evening or my slave some days) or you just try to use a different word that might not mean what you want or you choose what looks like the best option. Or you just memorize as much spellings as you can and cry when you run into multiple ways to spell the same word. In my field the differences between pronunciation of words from British to American to other nationalities can confuse the heck out of my brain -- which is why I'm not a classicists but I historian. I spend a lot of time trying to read lips too to make up for the sounds I hear that simply do not match up to letters in my brain. I guess I didn't say it very clearly. I am understanding and supportive of those that struggle with writing/spelling/grammer. It sucks & it is a painful lifelong issue, I was married to a dyslexic man for 20 years. I wrote everything for him & I took care of every single bit of paperwork in both our business and marriage. I DO know. I am not supportive of folks that just won't take the time to use spell check & hit enter without even proofreading. I am not supportive of lazy people who have the capability but refuse to put any effort into it. That is the difference I tried to state in my original post. ORIGINAL: cjenny I see a huge difference between ESL, dylexia etc and just being lazy. stamped IMO

CreativeDominant -> RE: Judging someone online by the quality of their communication (1/3/2007 4:40:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DominaSmartass I'm sure this topic has been covered before, probably many times. I'm just curious (inspired by a recent thread with some really incoherent typing...) How does the way someone communicates online affect the way you "see" them? Do you ignore typos, incorrect spelling, or grammar mistakes because it's just not that important? Or does it turn you off to someone completely when they don't seem to have a firm grasp on the language - or on their keyboard? To a certain extent, yes it does. Like a lot of people, I don't have a problem with the occasional typo or grammatical error. I make typos and I am sure there are times when I use ellipses or semi-colons wrong, but I do try to go back and correct myself. The more time I spend on the forums, the more familiar I have become with certain posters' writing style. There are some posters that, despite frequent atrocious spelling or grammatical errors, convey an unexplored or novel or interesting idea and they do so in a clear, linear manner. I read through these people's posts because of the content of the idea being expressed, despite the occasional difficulty their typing gives me. There are other posters who not only display frequently terrible spelling and grammatical errors but also showcase unclear or lazy thought or concepts that are ill-defined. I avoid these posts because the difficulty of wading through the poor spelling and grammar is now compounded by a lack of thought and/or poor expression of that thought. It is a medium of text communication, like it or not and, again like it or not, what you think and how well you can communicate it does make an impact.

SweetDommes -> RE: Judging someone online by the quality of their communication (1/3/2007 4:43:28 PM)
roy - my point was that you seem to have a good enough grasp of spelling and grammar that both of your posts appear to have all words spelled correctly and other than a lack of capitalization (which isn't that big of a deal for me) you have good grammar as well - my issues with other people's grammar tend to be more along the lines of punctuation, spacing, and correct wording. I'm genuinely confused as to why you would be offended that some of us expect people to make an effort - you apparently have (or are good enough that, despite your protests, it comes naturally to you), so you aren't the type of person that I refuse to e-mail with or read their posts.

boytoyroy -> RE: Judging someone online by the quality of their communication (1/3/2007 4:51:52 PM)
exactly juliet, people that judge others by their own ability to articulate , are in my opinion , shallow, it would be like me judging someone solely on their ability to run a rack of nineball ,or their ability to , build a house .,or play guitar because it is something I do well!

domiguy -> RE: Judging someone online by the quality of their communication (1/3/2007 4:54:12 PM)
How a women presents herself is of tremendous import...for I have found that women who often do not use proper grammar have a propensity for deep throating,,,whereas a women who tends to utilize run on sentences seems to be unable to "self" lubricate and usually emits a "carrotesque" fragrance from said "go-go hole." Though I have no real imperical data to back up such sophomoric claims...will delve deeper into research....Need to find a hobby. out. D.G. p.s. Jesus please protect me from your followers.

boytoyroy -> RE: Judging someone online by the quality of their communication (1/3/2007 4:58:35 PM)
well Msweet, because i see this for what it is , and when i turn off this p.c. and go to the outside world ,the real world where people can't block me when i look into their eyes and speak, and they cannot hide and change their names , and communicate with people , noone ever questions my ability to spell or punctuate ! and I realy doubt , in the heat of a R/T scene anyone here realy questions anyones spelling and or punctuation! unles maybe you pass notes back and forth!

PatentLeatherMdm -> RE: Judging someone online by the quality of their communication (1/3/2007 5:06:43 PM)
Oh, that's a good one! I work with one of the brightest men I've ever met, he is not formally educated and can't write a sentence to save his life. He is nonetheless charming, astute and witty. It took months, however, for me to realize this and he's confident enough to share that he's dyslexic. Online, however, I am using certain parameters to make an initial determination whether or not the individual on the other end of the email is someone I would like to get better acquainted. Not everyone is a cracker-jack typist, and I do take that into consideration. Though the emphasis on and integration of technology today in our every day lives has placed a computer in arm's reach of just about everybody. If you're having difficult crafting a simple introduction, then you should practice your skills. I'm ole-skhool (sp?) and I like to be addressed courteously. All of these acronyms, make me crazy; and no I don't think that "LOL" an appropriate response to a statement very often. Laziness spells disaster to me, so I'm consider this a indicator of how interesting the "conversation" would be were it in person. I also do not relish having a conversation populated with smileys to convey actions or emotions: just say the damn thang! And finally, I'm not one of these people who spends hours on the computer at night reaching out to those in the D/s community; if you want to further your introduction with this Madame, you'll need to provide a phone number and appropriate times to call. This is the precursor to another pet peeve of mine: I'm a slave, how might I serve you Mistress; I live 2,000 miles away....

aSlavesLife -> RE: Judging someone on line by the quality of their communication (1/3/2007 5:16:11 PM)
I agree fully with my pet's previous post, but wanted to inject a little of my thought into this subject as well. I, like my pet, try to take into account language barriers and disabilities such as dyslexia. I do not think any less of these people when they make the effort to let others know of their disability. But this thread is not about " other forms of intelligence ". It is not about being world wise as opposed to " book learned ". It is about the fact that the method of communication on the forums is written. And shifting the subject of this thread to build a straw man of intolerant bullies sneering at the less fortunate, then self-righteously attempting to chastise the people who have never presented or even conveyed such " insults " seems to me to be a hollow attempt to cripple the real issue. People know that their writing skills will be their sole means of communication here. To claim that it is the literate members that are at fault for expressing distaste and exasperation toward those incapable of coherent writing is ridiculous. As this is the only way to communicate here, it only makes sense that most of us would express annoyance at the people who put no effort into making their thoughts clear in writing. Whether the person is " book learned " or " world wise ", is irrelevant. If they are intelligent they have tools at their disposal to correct most of their writing problems.

SweetDommes -> RE: Judging someone online by the quality of their communication (1/3/2007 5:23:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: boytoyroy well Msweet, because i see this for what it is , and when i turn off this p.c. and go to the outside world ,the real world where people can't block me when i look into their eyes and speak, and they cannot hide and change their names , and communicate with people , noone ever questions my ability to spell or punctuate ! and I realy doubt , in the heat of a R/T scene anyone here realy questions anyones spelling and or punctuation! unles maybe you pass notes back and forth! In my experience, those who are unable or unwilling to make the effort to communicate clearly online are going to be the same people who are unwilling and unable to make an effort at things that are important to us offline. We have made exceptions in the past, but it didn't go very well. Because we haven't been able to connect with anyone through our offline endevours that is compatable with us, we are stuck trying to meet people initially online. This means that, whether or not you find them to be shallow, we have to have some standards. One of them is, that we have to be able to understand what the hell the person is saying to us. Communication is vital, and when face to face interactions are not an option, we are left with the written (typed, in this case) word. Pardon me for expecting people to put the same effort into their communications that I put into mine. If that makes me shallow, then so be it.

mellian -> RE: Judging someone online by the quality of their communication (1/3/2007 5:30:46 PM)
Spelling and Grammar is obvious, if one is not bothered to make the effort to write properlly, then they are not worth talking to. As for other aspects, it can be pretty iffy considering people can get varying impressions from what someone writes, how they write it and so on without the body language and tone. I know how I write and how I talk in person can be quite different, especially if they never met me in person. -mellian

KittenInterruptd -> RE: Judging someone online by the quality of their communication (1/3/2007 5:45:38 PM)
"Properlly" has only one letter 'L'. If you are going to author a post about spelling and grammar (which should have a lower case 'g' seeing as it isn't a proper noun, nor is it starting a sentence,) then you may want to consult a dictionary.

Noah -> RE: Judging someone online by the quality of their communication (1/3/2007 5:56:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: redbottombonanza Dearest Emperor, I couldn't agree with you more. I guess we are two fish swimming upstream together. I too, judge those who send me poorly written, thought out, and misspelled messages. So how does the syntax work here? Do you judge those who send message which are poorly written, messages which are thought out, and messages which are misspelled? Or do you judge those who send you poorly written, poorly thought out and poorly misspelled messages? quote: I cringe to think about the comments made about my foriegn correspondence. Typos are precisely that....typing errors. Most of the time these can be easily spotted... Nothing poorly done about that misspelling. Who knows? It may even have been a typo. I think the Emperordude walks his talk. I'd like to have that kind of facility with the finer points. His technical errors are so scarce that it isn't even worth being enough of a dick to go root out one or two. All the same I'm willing to look past writing errors in order to get to the ideas in a post. Lord knows my posts request that of my readers. On the other hand paragraphs put together as well as E1956's tend to be, well they just seem to shine another light on the ideas contained. Whether or not I end up valuing the ideas (I often do in his case) I can still appreciate the paragraphs and the experience of consuming them. I guess for me it is with posts the way it is with music. I can admire technical virtuosity on the radio but I'll never buy a ticket to go hear technical virtuosity. I want to hear some heart and some soul, maybe some guts and once in a while some genius. All of those things can be made manifest by the virtuoso, of course, but technical excellence is absolutely not required. A little talent and a lot of passion will do it, sometimes. As will a genius for music which has nothing to do with technical refinement. I'll take R.L. Burnside over Rory Block all day long. I respect the hell out of her chops but after about a minute and a half all they do is make my ears tired. When I read here I'm looking mostly for insight, and fun. I love to find some of either in a gorgeously constructed bit of prose (or poetry, for that matter.) I'll take it just as gratefully, though, with some stutters and stumbles and throat-clearing mixed in. I've hung out in various kinds of joints in the real world. A little bit of what you hear at a logic colloquium or a highbrow party makes going there worth the trip, often enough. The same goes for shitty bars and welfare lines where a lot of people don't talk so good, by one standard. Vapid crap carefully constructed gives me a stronger negative impression than some jamoke just passing the time of day without any fussiness. And vapid crap wrapped in faux-erudition is, like, totally fukdup. IMHO Hell, one of the loveliest things I ever read on the Internet was a stumbling little listserve discourse on unrequieted love.

BDSM05478 -> RE: Judging someone online by the quality of their communication (1/3/2007 5:58:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania "Will you go steady with me?"...smiles Circle yes or no [sm=flowers.gif] I use to hate those notes in primary school!

Noah -> RE: Judging someone online by the quality of their communication (1/3/2007 6:04:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cjenny Maybe I see it as using good manners? I would be turned off by someone chewing with their mouth open and wiping their face with their sleeve. edited to add the seemingly required IMO bit But of course the IMO bit is not required, least of all for a post like that one. You made it clear without any such clunky signage that you were stating an opinion, describing a personal preference. I value the ability and willingness to do that above grammatical excellence. Fair play, though, if you don't like people wiping slobber on their sleeves you oughta do something about that avatar picture. I take it you aren't so offended by moist corners on bedspreads. Edited to add: ... and that profile picture, too.

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0470047