(Untitled)

May 24, 2005 18:19

I no I just poosted butt hear I amn agen ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

chaucer_volante May 25 2005, 21:20:14 UTC
Ignore him.

Standardized spelling is a newfangled tool of capitalist bureaucracy.
But, then again, so am I.

Reply

howie_lovie May 25 2005, 22:08:50 UTC
I disagree. Standardized spelling is a way to make communication easier, and less confounding. If everyone could simply spell everything in their own way, then no one would know what anyone else is saying.

If you want true anarchy in grammar, than words would not even follow a phonetic aspect, and then communication via the written word would truly be impossible.

Capitalist bureaucracy has nothing to do with it.

Reply

burning_blake May 26 2005, 04:51:25 UTC
I don't think he said anything about true anarchy in grammar.

Reply

howie_lovie May 26 2005, 04:56:35 UTC
And Lucas said nothing about the capitalist bureaucracy. Your point?

Reply

burning_blake May 26 2005, 12:14:12 UTC
My point is that nobody was advocating a complete breakdown of grammar. Creative spelling may be confusing to some people, but it doesn't--in and of itself--produce total gibberish.

Reply

howie_lovie May 26 2005, 17:11:47 UTC
Total or not, gibberish is gibberish.

Reply

burning_blake May 26 2005, 17:23:44 UTC
I found it perfectly understandable.

Reply

howie_lovie May 26 2005, 17:25:32 UTC
Oh, I understood it. I simply had to partake of an asprin afterwards.

Reply

burning_blake May 26 2005, 17:32:42 UTC
Now who's delicate?

Reply

howie_lovie May 26 2005, 17:38:47 UTC
I never said things didn't affect me. I simply don't whine incessantly when they do. I take an asprin and continue on, and give my opinion if I believe it is due.

Since part of the theme of her journal entry was her spelling problem, I thought my comment was within context.

As an aside--let it not be said that Lucas whined incessantly. She has been surprisingly silent throughout this, which is either an indication that she does not care, cannot partake of it, or is ashamed.

In those three cases, respectively: she should; a pity; unacceptable, as being ashamed will not help her in the slightest.

Reply

mary_ephelia May 26 2005, 18:09:20 UTC
"Since part of the theme of her journal entry was her spelling problem, I thought my comment was within context ( ... )

Reply

howie_lovie May 26 2005, 18:15:34 UTC
I have never been particularly in need of tact, and constructive is subjective.

She may be shy, and that is perfectly alright. I did not say her not being in the conversation was wrong, I was simply stating what my opinion was on the three possibilities I saw.

That might be likely--however, we are all forged by our experiences and upbringing--a concept you have candidly defended throughout this conversation. Rather silly of you to use it as an argument now.

When I took up fencing, I learned more than how to collapse lungs.

Reply

mary_ephelia May 26 2005, 18:40:59 UTC
I wasn't using it as an argument. You need to perfect your study of rhetoric as well as your grasp of human interaction.

Eyes are a tempting target, too, and so are the great vessels of the neck. The heart is harder; it's farther left than most people realize. Unless you hit one of the major blood vessels, the liver just rolls on. Besides, I meant for you to survive and learn from your follies. So lung it is.

Reply

howie_lovie May 26 2005, 18:47:19 UTC
I've found that the knees or the back of the ankles are the best targets for such "lessons." But to each their own, I suppose.

Reply

howie_lovie May 26 2005, 18:17:29 UTC
As an aside, you would note that while my suggestion was a sharp knife, yours seems to be a pointy sword. Was it you that, somewhere else, mentioned a pot and a kettle?

Reply

mary_ephelia May 26 2005, 18:42:29 UTC
Proportionality, Lovecraft. Or is your grasp of that weak, too?

Reply


Leave a comment

Up