<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrooklynBound @ May 24 2008, 07:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kid Chocolate @ May 24 2008, 06:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FOMW @ May 24 2008, 06:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kid Chocolate @ May 24 2008, 04:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I just have a tough time following a debate when there are posts that are about 10 paragraphs long that could be summed down to about 2 sentences. It's un-necessary.</div> If you could so easily "sum down to 2 sentences" everything I stated, first, feel free to do so so that I can list all the valuable amplification and nuance you missed. Second, if you could really sum up my arguments so succinctly, you clearly didn't have a "tough time following the debate," and your excuse for elbowing your way into the insult line is a naked fraud to justify your own hostility to another poster. Here's an option you didn't explore, which would have been preferable to the tact you chose: Don't follow the debate or read long posts! If it's so taxing, if the task of actually reading 3 or 4 (NOT 10) paragraphs in a post is too tough for you, stick to the threads or portions of threads that contain the 4-8 word nuggets of wisdom you seem to crave. </div> Now I think you're just doing it on purpose. </div> It seems like a reasonable request from her, can you do it? </div> Fixed it for ya
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kid Chocolate @ May 24 2008, 06:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Don't be condescending. All value at this point is speculative because none of these prospects have played in an NBA game yet. All prospect values are subjective. Okafor had more value before the draft because he played in college, Howard had more value after playing in the NBA, because he dominated. If you had a 25 year old Shaq, and someone offered Deron Williams and the #1 pick (D-Ho), it all depends on the subjective value of how Howard will turn out. No one knows how he will turn out, so you need to gauge the value of that pick before he plays in a game. Beasley's character is an issue, and that could diminish his value. The Heat could trade the rights to Beasley for RJ, because they'd rather get the definite value and play it safe, than take a risk in Beasley. If you don't want to read long, wordy posts, don't read this, because that's how I always post and always will. Thanks!</div> If you seriously think what you wrote makes as much sense or flows or reads anywhere near as easily as what I wrote, then there really is no point in continuing this "discussion" (and I'm ignoring the few blatant grammatical errors that completely changed the meaning of what you were trying to say.) Put me on "ignore" and stick to all that insight you cull from reading one-three sentence posts as empty as your own. ETA: BTW it took you ELEVEN sentences (after punctuational corrections.)
It reads much easier because it's not superfluous. It's nine sentences, as the only punctuational edit to be made would be adding a semi-colon in the 4th sentence, which still keeps it as one. Don't ignore my "grammatical mishaps", tell me how they are wrong, English teacher. Thanks for playing, this is fun!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ May 24 2008, 09:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>All that post really says is that NBA teams have to evaluate players in the draft and the value of each player varies depending on each team's situation. It's not exactly earth-shattering insight, and it really doesn't have much to do with the discussion about the specific trade Netted proposed.</div> You missed all the valuable amplification and nuance!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FOMW @ May 24 2008, 08:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>If you seriously think what you wrote makes as much sense or flows or reads anywhere near as easily as what I wrote, then there really is no point in continuing this "discussion" (and I'm ignoring the few blatant grammatical errors that completely changed the meaning of what you were trying to say.) Put me on "ignore" and stick to all that insight you cull from reading one-three sentence posts as empty as your own. ETA: BTW it took you ELEVEN sentences (after punctuational corrections.)</div> While I appreciate a well spoken individual, I think you're losing perspective. You seem to be educated, and knowledgable of the many details of communication except one: context. Context can determine when something is appropriate, as well as determine the effectiveness of a message being communicated to your audience. So go ahead and compliment yourself; continue to glorify your endless knowledge, and superior rhetor skills. In the end it's all pointless, though. You've lost track that this is a message board; a label that does not reflect on the people who frequent them, but rather speaks to the standards of effective communication on them. You're doing a poor job of communicating the points you've making, because you're not adapting your delivery method to fit this medium. I mean is anyone else questioning how someone whose ego holds themself in such high esteem recommends that someone just skip over their posts? I'm glad KC summarized your posts. While it doesn't use the, uh, aggrandized lexicon that occupies your posts, it's something that I feel is worth my time ...had he not done so I would have never known that I agree with you on many aspects of this topic. I can honestly say that I can count the number of your posts that I've read completely on one hand, and I can honestly say that I haven't lost anything by doing so. So if people can ignore your posts and stay on topic, how great of a speaker and poster are you, really?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FOMW @ May 24 2008, 06:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>If you could so easily "sum down to 2 sentences" everything I stated, first, feel free to do so so that I can list all the valuable amplification and nuance you missed.</div> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FOMW @ May 24 2008, 08:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>If you seriously think what you wrote makes as much sense or flows or reads anywhere near as easily as what I wrote, then there really is no point in continuing this "discussion" (and I'm ignoring the few blatant grammatical errors that completely changed the meaning of what you were trying to say.)</div> Sounds like a cop out.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kid Chocolate @ May 24 2008, 08:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>It reads much easier because it's not superfluous. It's nine sentences, as the only punctuational edit to be made would be adding a semi-colon in the 4th sentence, which still keeps it as one. Don't ignore my "grammatical mishaps", tell me how they are wrong, English teacher. Thanks for playing, this is fun!</div> Since many at this forum are apparently bored enough to actually be following this stuff (and I must be just as bored to actually be participating), I'll post my reply to the forum for their continued amusement instead of in a PM. This will be my last step into the quicksand of your pettiness, however. You are free to have the "last word", which you no doubt will. I do urge those that actually want to discuss basketball to skip right over this post, as I feel more than a little embarrassment for continuing even this far. Teacher's comments are in red. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kid Chocolate @ May 24 2008, 06:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Don't be condescending. All value at this point is speculative because none of these prospects have played in an NBA game yet. All prospect values are subjective. Okafor had more value before the draft because he played in college, Howard had more value after playing in the NBA, because he dominated. <span style="color:#ff0000">Your last sentence contains two independent clauses. You could have used a semicolon to separate them, but you didn't. You also could have used a comma and conjunction, as in my previous and present sentences, but you didn't. The subordinate clause in your last sentence requires no set off, so your last comma is inappropriate.</span> If you had a 25 year old Shaq, and someone offered Deron Williams and the #1 pick (D-Ho), it all depends on the subjective value of how Howard will turn out. <span style="color:#ff0000"> WTF does this mean? This "sentence" is nonsensical. You drew no relationship between the dependent and independent clauses. They are totally unrelated. More importantly, you omitted everything necessary to understanding the example I put forth. (Paraphrasing it would have obviously required too many words, tending to disprove the very thing you were attempting to prove.) The final (independent) clause of the sentence itself is a piss poor attempt to condense my point about subjective value. "The subjective value of how Howard will turn out?" You simply juxtaposed the word "subjective" with some other words with no care or aim to actually offer a sensible thought. Meanwhile, back to the requested free grammar lesson, you violated a cardinal grammatical rule by ending the aforementioned "sentence" with a preposition. </span>No one knows how he will turn out, so you need to gauge the value of that pick before he plays in a game. <span style="color:#ff0000"> This sentence is fine grammatically (save another dangling preposition) but not logically and is almost diamtetrically opposite what I posted. You can't completely gauge the value of a prospect before he's played some NBA games! That's the whole point! So of course you CAN'T "gauge the value of that pick before he plays a game," as you urge.</span> Beasley's character is an issue, and that could diminish his value. The Heat could trade the rights to Beasley for RJ, because they'd rather get the definite value and play it safe, than take a risk in Beasley. <span style="color:#ff0000">To use your word "superfluous", you really like superfluous commas, don't you? You put two of them in the sentence above.</span> If you don't want to read long, wordy posts, don't read this, because that's how I always post and always will. <span style="color:#ff0000"> Thanks for another gratuitous comma (must be something about that "because" word that really throws you). Other than that, I could've said it better (and did), but your version will suffice.</span> Thanks! <span style="color:#ff0000">Am I to say, "Your welcome?" GRADE: D </span></div>
I already said that a semi-colon could be put. Ending a sentence with a preposition isn't a grammatical gaffe. Big deal, I put an extra comma in before because, or elsewhere...that changes the whole meaning, right? As for the sentences that you can't understand, ******* take it for what it is instead of microscopically inspecting every little word. I'm pretty sure that everyone understands what is being said, but you don't want to admit that and will find ANYTHING wrong with it to prove your point.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FOMW @ May 24 2008, 10:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><span style="color:#ff0000">Other than that, I could've said it better (and did)</span></div> No you couldn't have, and didn't. Based on all the people who are complimenting your ability I'd say that's evidence to support that you are the one who thinks most highly of posts, and you are the one who looks forward to reading them. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>valuable amplification</div> My arse
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GMJigga @ May 24 2008, 08:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>While I appreciate a well spoken individual, I think you're losing perspective. You seem to be educated, and knowledgable of the many details of communication except one: context. Context can determine when something is appropriate, as well as determine the effectiveness of a message being communicated to your audience. So go ahead and compliment yourself; continue to glorify your endless knowledge, and superior rhetor skills. In the end it's all pointless, though. You've lost track that this is a message board; a label that does not reflect on the people who frequent them, but rather speaks to the standards of effective communication on them. You're doing a poor job of communicating the points you've making, because you're not adapting your delivery method to fit this medium. I mean is anyone else questioning how someone whose ego holds themself in such high esteem recommends that someone just skip over their posts? I'm glad KC summarized your posts. While it doesn't use the, uh, aggrandized lexicon that occupies your posts, it's something that I feel is worth my time ...had he not done so I would have never known that I agree with you on many aspects of this topic.</div> GM, I have (heretofore) no beef with you, though I think you've lost at least as much perspective as I have in this thread. I in no way affirmatively, by insinuation or any other means, attempted to call attention to my posts as meriting any more consideration, deference, or respect than any other post. I never, ever implied that I was smarter or in any way "better" than anyone else here simply because my approach to dialog is to be thorough, detail-oriented, and meticulous with the use of language. I simply got sick of ghoti -- who, once upon a time, was a rather pleasant fellow -- making snide, unprovoked snips and insults simply because he didn't like that approach, that personal style of communication. Go back and review the genesis of this huge digression. It started with ghoti and was exacerbated when Kid Chocolate chimed in. There are plenty of posts on message boards, here and elsewhere, which I effectively ignore because I don't find their content personally interesting or worthy of engagement. Some, on topics varying from camera equipment to music software, are simply too long for the investment of reading time that I'm willing to make on any given day. But I have NEVER used that fact to insult the person that took the time to write them, nor would I have the audacity and bad manners to read their post and then essentially ridicule them for writing a post that I chose to read! If we're going to air out our preferences, I don't particularly care for "boyz & the hood" spelling, run on sentences lacking punctuation, or thoughts that are not properly organized in paragraphs to make a post more visually appealing and easy to read when the eye is sweeping back to the next line. I especially don't care for text that makes inappropriate use of capital letters, whether by employing all caps in multiple sentences or omitting them altogether. But I have never, even on the forum I administer, criticized a person for posting in all lower case, nor have I ever done anything more than politely remind that all capitals, all the time, is considered the internet equivalent of shouting. Certainly that should tell you something about who is "going with the flow" around here -- who stands for the democratic ideal of letting people enjoy some personal, individual freedom of expression -- and who is trying to impose their fascist standards of discourse on others. I'm curious as to why at least three people in this thread feel so affronted, irritated, or threatened by the simple phenomena of what they consider "verbosity"? There was not a hint of elitism accompanying it until I was repeatedly attacked and made to defend something which should have required no defense. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>So if people can ignore your posts and stay on topic, how great of a speaker and poster are you, really?</div> Don't you see that, by that very fact of urging the disinterested to ignore my posts, the accusation that I write the way I do out of some ego trip is exposed as wholly false and unfair? I value precision in thought and language. I try to be precise when I write. It's just the way I am. I try to keep my posts relatively lean while not devoting a lifetime to editing them. But I disagree that the majority of points I make could be made as effectively in 80% less words, or some such proportion. If you wonder how I can be comfortable urging others to skip my posts if they find them too long, it's simply because -- duh! -- I don't presume that everyone will be interested in reading "long" posts! My ego is not wrapped up in how many people read my posts! My ethic leads me to simply "be myself" rather than to change who I am or how I write to satisfy those who are not likely to see this issue the way I do. (See Hamlet). I would simply rather be ignored than insulted.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GMJigga @ May 24 2008, 10:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FOMW @ May 24 2008, 10:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><span style="color:#ff0000">Other than that, I could've said it better (and did)</span></div> No you couldn't have, and didn't. Based on all the people who are complimenting your ability I'd say that's evidence to support that you are the one who thinks most highly of posts, and you are the one who looks forward to reading them. </div> Can I ask why you are doing this? What have I ever said to you that makes you so resentful? Are you best friends with Kid Chocolate, or something? If so, no sweat. I understand. If not, why are you getting involved in this? And if this is about establishing that there are others who DO appreciate my style of writing, should I forward to you the 100+ private messages and emails that I've received over the years that contain gushing praise of it (some even from members of this forum(!) and its predecessor)? Would you prefer a link to a couple of other forums where there are public statements to the same effect? Whether you realize it or not, it's not my style to toot my own horn. But trust me on this: I could if I really wanted to.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FOMW @ May 25 2008, 12:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Can I ask why you are doing this? What have I ever said to you that makes you so resentful? Are you best friends with Kid Chocolate, or something? If so, no sweat. I understand. If not, why are you getting involved in this?</div> Please do everyone a favor and post lists of who is allowed to read your posts, who is allowed to comment on what you write, and what the acceptable reasons are for those people to comment. Also, please indicate in what tone you wish responses to be and which content is acceptable to disagree with. If you wish to post templates to guide potential respondents, that would be helpful as well.
I scanned the above, and saw that your referenced, and compared yourself to, Hamlet. I rest my case. If you're looking for cause, I decided to give my 2 cents at the sight of the egregious self-praise you were giving yourself. Such intelligent writing was lost when it left with your modesty
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GMJigga @ May 24 2008, 11:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I scanned the above, and saw that your referenced, and compared yourself to, Hamlet. I rest my case. If you're looking for cause, I decided to give my 2 cents at the sight of the egregious self-praise you were giving yourself. Such intelligent writing was lost when it left with your modesty</div> You think an allusion to the phrase "to thine own self be true" is SELF PRAISE? On what planet were you born? If brevity ("see Hamlet" instead of spelling out "to thine own self be true") can lead to even a misunderstanding such as this, how in the world can you criticize when I take the time to be perfectly clear?
The quip about Hamlet was about your most recent post. I didn't feel that Hamlet was indicative of any self-praise. Rather your self-praise has been going on earlier in this thread. Obviously, you asked me why I decided to get involved and gave that as a reason, which means it had to have been going on before the post you made that referenced your sad plight to that of Hamlet. I hope this is now clear.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ May 24 2008, 11:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FOMW @ May 25 2008, 12:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Can I ask why you are doing this? What have I ever said to you that makes you so resentful? Are you best friends with Kid Chocolate, or something? If so, no sweat. I understand. If not, why are you getting involved in this?</div> Please do everyone a favor and post lists of who is allowed to read your posts, who is allowed to comment on what you write, and what the acceptable reasons are for those people to comment. Also, please indicate in what tone you wish responses to be and which content is acceptable to disagree with. If you wish to post templates to guide potential respondents, that would be helpful as well. </div> It's really very simple, ghoti, and despite your sarcasm and desire to artificially prolong this as some kind of pissing contest, I know you are plenty smart enough to understand: I welcome anyone to read my posts who finds them worth reading. I welcome anyone to respond to my posts who can do so in a reasonably cordial manner and without including condescending, sarcastic, backdoor insults like these (from you): <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>"This is so obvious I feel bad explaining it." "Finally! You got there!" "Why do you keep posting long winded explanations that have nothing to do with this simple reply? I don't understand the other nonsense you posted, but it is frustrating when someone who has such a vast "capacity for understanding" can't grasp a simple point like this." "Through much penetrating insight and many important-sounding words we have apparently established that NBA franchises are well-served to evaluate draft prospects (since, you know, they haven't actually played in the league and all)."</div> All of the above are centered on ME, not the topic, and were issued for the single and sole purpose of derision. You were never perfectly mannered (who is?), but you used to get this.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FOMW @ May 25 2008, 01:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>(from you):</div> Oh sweet that means I'm good to go! Tough nuts, ghoti. haha jk jk
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GMJigga @ May 24 2008, 11:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>The quip about Hamlet was about your most recent post. I didn't feel that Hamlet was indicative of any self-praise. Rather your self-praise has been going on earlier in this thread. Obviously, you asked me why I decided to get involved and gave that as a reason, which means it had to have been going on before the post you made that referenced your sad plight to that of Hamlet. I hope this is now clear.</div> I have definitely entered the Twilight Zone. Where else could a person defending herself against unprovoked insults and inaccurate accuastions be viewed as engaging in "self praise".
I don't see any insults. Perhaps you can point them out so I won't make the same mistake in the future. I am simply requesting that you tell us all exactly how you require people respond to you. I feel that's reasonable to ask considering how frustrated you seem about not being able to control other members' reactions to your posts.
