Language usage
PostPosted:Thu Feb 26, 2015 6:51 pm
I've noticed one of my problem with the Internet is its lack of mastery of language. While it's unrealistic to expect sophiscated argument online, a lot of this stuff literally hurts your brain. Here's some of my biggest issues:
1. Grammar and spelling. I don't actually mind this too much, maybe partly because I was never very good at grammar. To me, if you're going to yell at each other for saying stupid things, something like 'teh sun ain't no here' is one of the things I'm least concerned about. I mean, it wouldn't hurt to not screw this up, but as long as I can understand someone I don't see a problem and it's really bothersome to have some people always crying about that, most likely because they can't even make any other point even by Internet standards.
2. Analogies. Should be banned on the Internet. I get that your idea of an analogy that proves me wrong is always wrong and vice versa, but most attempts at using analogy is more like 'today I had McDonald's for lunch, which is like the ISIS shooting nonbelievers'. Even if analogies are good people never agree if the one you make is appropriate if it'll conveniently prove them wrong, but it's not like most conversion ever get to that point.
3. Sarcasm/Satire/Hyperbole. Should also be banned, or the user needs to take a test and explain why A Modest Proposal is an example of a proper usage of satire. It'd probably be easier to just ban this outright, as 99% of the people have no idea what they're talking about and the 1% who does, the other 99% will have no idea what he's talking about.
4. Inventing new words. They should apply a similar test as what I call the 'guaranteed victory' problem in sports. A guy proposed that if anybody made a guaranteed soandso is supposed to win but failed, he's not allowed to be on the record to guarantee anything else for the next five years. There should be an Internet body that determines whether a new word is cool enough to be used, and if not, whoever invented it should be revoked access on the Internet for the next five years. The word should be rated on originality/popularity and either is sufficient. All Chinese invented words should be banned, because they're like a step below the overabundance of acronyms. For example, recently I saw 'Bullet Hell' (originally Danmaku) used to describe Youtube like services, and what does Bullet Hell have anything to do with Youtube type services? Because apparently the comment screen on Chinese Youtube type services is very spammy just like how a bullet hell game is very spammy with bullets, and I think that's a clear violation of the analogy rule above.
1. Grammar and spelling. I don't actually mind this too much, maybe partly because I was never very good at grammar. To me, if you're going to yell at each other for saying stupid things, something like 'teh sun ain't no here' is one of the things I'm least concerned about. I mean, it wouldn't hurt to not screw this up, but as long as I can understand someone I don't see a problem and it's really bothersome to have some people always crying about that, most likely because they can't even make any other point even by Internet standards.
2. Analogies. Should be banned on the Internet. I get that your idea of an analogy that proves me wrong is always wrong and vice versa, but most attempts at using analogy is more like 'today I had McDonald's for lunch, which is like the ISIS shooting nonbelievers'. Even if analogies are good people never agree if the one you make is appropriate if it'll conveniently prove them wrong, but it's not like most conversion ever get to that point.
3. Sarcasm/Satire/Hyperbole. Should also be banned, or the user needs to take a test and explain why A Modest Proposal is an example of a proper usage of satire. It'd probably be easier to just ban this outright, as 99% of the people have no idea what they're talking about and the 1% who does, the other 99% will have no idea what he's talking about.
4. Inventing new words. They should apply a similar test as what I call the 'guaranteed victory' problem in sports. A guy proposed that if anybody made a guaranteed soandso is supposed to win but failed, he's not allowed to be on the record to guarantee anything else for the next five years. There should be an Internet body that determines whether a new word is cool enough to be used, and if not, whoever invented it should be revoked access on the Internet for the next five years. The word should be rated on originality/popularity and either is sufficient. All Chinese invented words should be banned, because they're like a step below the overabundance of acronyms. For example, recently I saw 'Bullet Hell' (originally Danmaku) used to describe Youtube like services, and what does Bullet Hell have anything to do with Youtube type services? Because apparently the comment screen on Chinese Youtube type services is very spammy just like how a bullet hell game is very spammy with bullets, and I think that's a clear violation of the analogy rule above.
