Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
But can you really say that you don't know anyone at all here?
I can't speak for your "etc.", but as to what you mentioned, do you need to know those things to consider them a friend?
What I'm saying is that a person's core identity is the ideas that constitute their morality, or ethics.
Have you ever actually -owned- a dog?
But can you really say that you don't know anyone at all here?
Yes.
.I can't speak for your "etc.", but as to what you mentioned, do you need to know those things to consider them a friend?
That and a lot more.
I think I've discussed this in a thread somewhere on here. Friendship is something I'm very particular about. Out of respect to folks who are my friends, I don't refer to acquaintances (close or otherwise) as friends. Being friendly and being friends aren't the same things at all.
What I'm saying is that a person's core identity is the ideas that constitute their morality, or ethics.
That is certainly a large part of it. There's a part that's given by one's instinctive self as well. Both matter.
Have you ever actually -owned- a dog?
Ages ago, yes. My ex wife got the dog. LOL I loved the dog, but I am on the road well over 200 days a year and I think dogs need more attention than I have time to give them.
.
No, his posts make sense, the act of inflating them does not. If you want someone to read you post, you make it short, clear, and concise so you're not wasting people's time.You've always had the ability to make me smile . It looks like he never responded to this post of yours, so I will. Perhaps I missed something, but I tend to agree with your first sentence. You know I'm a lefty, so I think it's hardly surprising that I would find the premise that you ascribe to his OP as valid. From my short conversation with him on the subject, I'm not sure that -he- considers himself a lefty, so perhaps he took offense. Anyway, if that first sentence didn't offend him, I imagine that the second and third one that he may well have. I would have responded, though. I almost always did with you. I think it's pretty hard not to offend opponents online in some way or another (I'm sure I've done my part here), but you tend to back down when you really get going (for instance the whole "nutjob" thing), and that's why I keep on responding to you .
Whether he considers himself a lefty or not, he's clearly one.
Pumpkin knows best eh ;-)?
He's just not a lefty that has no idea how the economy works. If that were the case, he'd be a Socialist~
Like lil 'ol me, huh ;-)?
I don't back down. I just don't need to keep reiterating that lefties and Socialists are nutjobs, because it's an easily observable fact.
Careful, those are fighting words
It's pretty clear that he's trying to impress himself, his posting style has won over far fewer people(If any at all) than it has turned away.
He seems to be fine with the amount of people that don't mind the way he posts. Not everything is a numbers game.
A skilled writer tries to target as wide of an audience as possible, and that being the case, it would make far more sense to not waste everyone's time fluffing out his post.
He feels that the way he writes his posts is fine. He generally doesn't use base insults, which is what I primarily object to in posts as you know, and, the economy aside, he and I tend to agree on things, which is certainly another plus.
People don't use most of the words he goes out of his way jam into his post because it hinders a conversation for someone to look it up.
I think he may have mentioned to me in the past that he's around 60. Different generations communicate differently. I also think he's fairly well educated. My guess is that he's not going out of his way to use words that to many are exotic- my guess is that's just the way he communicates in general.
People don't make long speeches in the midst of a conversation because it prevents people from being interested. Sure, someone could be excited at the start, but about the time you realize most of the words are fluff, you realize it's a gigantic waste of time. As a writer, you should try NOT to waste everyone's time, you should be clear, concise, and to the point. He is none of those things, and there's no point to that other to impress himself with his post size.
Tell me, does he remind you of anyone you know ;-)?
I speak to 60, 70, 80 year olds who don't use those words. Passing it off like Banality and excoriate were normal words to use in a conversation is plane ignorance. Most people avoid words that are longer to type or say in favor of shorter ones so a conversation or post is quicker and smoother.
Yeah, I do that, and I try to use words that are more commonly known as well. That being said, if I'm dealing with someone who I have a somewhat hostile relationship with, I may use higher end words- I'm somewhat fond of the saying "confusion to our enemies!", I'm sure you'll see my reasoning here. I definitely think it beats using base insults.
You're also speaking as though I'm saying he can't or shouldn't be able to post incompetently when that wasn't my argument in the first post.
I'm not saying that at all.
My point is that it makes no sense and he's trying to impress himself.
He makes sense to me. I may find some of his posts a bit too long, but then I might be able to level the same criticism against myself at times.
I'm perfectly fine with him trying to impress himself and inflate his ego with his posts,
You've made the assertion that he's doing this numerous times, but I haven't found any evidence for it. I think he's just doing his best to try to communicate certain concepts, which I assume is what most if not everyone else here is trying to do as well.
he just shouldn't make a thread complaining about people not bothering to waste their time reading said posts if he insists on posting that way.
Seems to me he made the thread because he wanted to learn why people were telling him TL;DR. I think he's essentially gotten his answer now, though there may be a few finer points left. Either that, or he's just enjoying the somewhat sidetracked conversation that continues
No, most people learn not make needlessly inflated posts when people keep saying it's too long and they didn't read it, so no, he doesn't remind me of anyone.
I see. I was thinking that perhaps he might remind you of me in a certain Economics thread ;-).
No, his posts make sense, the act of inflating them does not. If you want someone to read you post, you make it short, clear, and concise so you're not wasting people's time.
Hey, just because you can't tell it's happening doesn't mean it is.
.you also can't tell Socialism doesn't work, despite it being an easily observable fact.
The obvious seems to slip past you easily, so it's fine.
.
Sure, dude, by making a massive wall of text that dwarfs the posts in the entire rest of the thread combined, he's being as short and concise as possible. Note the sarcasm there, I really meant it.No, his posts make sense, the act of inflating them does not. If you want someone to read you post, you make it short, clear, and concise so you're not wasting people's time.
I think he believes he is being as short, clear and concise as he can be, without losing what he wants to say.
Hey, just because you can't tell it's happening doesn't mean it is.
Conversely, just because you think it's happening doesn't mean it is
you also can't tell Socialism doesn't work, despite it being an easily observable fact.
Depending on one's definition, I may not even be a socialist. According to an author I referred to back when we were discussing Economics, Bernie and I are actually social democrats ;-).
The obvious seems to slip past you easily, so it's fine.
Lol
Sure, dude, by making a massive wall of text that dwarfs the posts in the entire rest of the thread combined, he's being as short and concise as possible. Note the sarcasm there, I really meant it.
Conversely, you can't even understand what definitions are...
I gave you an example earlier.Sure, dude, by making a massive wall of text that dwarfs the posts in the entire rest of the thread combined, he's being as short and concise as possible. Note the sarcasm there, I really meant it.
His posts don't seem that massive to me. Could you give me an example of a post of his that you consider massive?
Have you ever actually -owned- a dog?
Ages ago, yes. My ex wife got the dog. LOL I loved the dog, but I am on the road well over 200 days a year and I think dogs need more attention than I have time to give them.
Yep. They are definitely pretty high maintenance, but they can also be very good friends, in my view
I gave you an example earlier.Sure, dude, by making a massive wall of text that dwarfs the posts in the entire rest of the thread combined, he's being as short and concise as possible. Note the sarcasm there, I really meant it.
His posts don't seem that massive to me. Could you give me an example of a post of his that you consider massive?
Have you ever actually -owned- a dog?
Ages ago, yes. My ex wife got the dog. LOL I loved the dog, but I am on the road well over 200 days a year and I think dogs need more attention than I have time to give them.
Yep. They are definitely pretty high maintenance, but they can also be very good friends, in my view
Wow. You and I have very different conceptions of what it means to be a friend.
I think pets, dogs in particular, make good companions. That's it.
.Getting back to the central topic of the thread -- one's feeling obliged to share that a piece of writing is TL thus one DR -- I get the impression that far too many folks have determined that a great many writings, not just mine, fall into that category for them. Obviously I understand the tacit sentiment of TL;DR: "I'm interested in the topic or what the writer may have to say, but I am unwilling to read it because it requires too much effort/time of me to do so." That's not an unusual or strange sentiment at all. I felt that way about quite a few books I've labored through:
Of those books and quite a few others, I can say only that it was a good thing I had to read them for a class and a grade. True, that's slightly different from being entirely unwilling to have read them; I was willing to read them, but only because I was unwilling to be given a low mark when the time came to discuss them. Here, that impetus clearly doesn't exist.
- James Joyce -- Ulysses, Finnegans Wake
- William Faulkner -- The Sound and the Fury
- Gabriel García Márquez -- One Hundred Years of Solitude
- John Milton -- Paradise Lost
- Gustave Flaubert -- Madame Bovary
- George Eliot -- Silas Marner
- Edmund Spenser -- The Faerie Queene
- Herman Melville -- Moby Dick
- Several other of the Great Books -- IMO, quite a few of them while great for the ideas they contain are not at all that great to actually read.
What I think is going on here is that folks have an assumption about what other members post. That assumption is that the writer aims to be "consumed" by everyone here. That may be so for some writers here, but it's not at all true for me. I'm well aware that what I write will not appeal to everyone. My writing isn't even intended to appeal to everyone. What is my target audience? Those folks who care enough about the topic to consider it and respond to it with a comparable level of completeness, introspection, and analytical rigor. I know that's not likely going to be "everyone" or even many people. Indeed, I'd just as soon folks who aren't in the target audience not read my long posts. That works out best for them and me, especially insofar as we don't know each other thus there's no tangibly personal connection between us.
While it's nice to have more readers than less, that's something I care about with regard to the business white papers I submit for various conventions and lectures. I know quite well who comprise the audience; moreover, I'm not choosing the audience I want to reach with those documents. The audience is predefined and I write specifically for its members. But here's the thing nobody has ever reached out to me and of a paper I wrote shared with me that the paper was too long thus they didn't read it. In fact, nobody's ever bothered to tell me they didn't read the paper, regardless of what they thought about a paper's length.
Here, the audience consists of pretty much anyone who can access the site. Accordingly, I am free to choose what subset of that vast audience I care to target. I'm not required to write for everyone; thus I don't. As a writer, I'm not alone in that regard. For example, Richard Feynman wrote QED with a broad target audience in mind, the point being to make quantum mechanics accessible to non-physicists; however, his "The Theory of a General Quantum System Interacting with a Linear Dissipative System" (QLDSI) is written for physicists. Can non-physicists read "QLDSI?" Of course they can, but unless they happened to have been his children or close friends, they were sorely mistaken to presume Feynman would have suffered their remarks that lacked a comparable level of comprehension and completeness.
So you see, I created this thread not to express any sentiment of my own about whether folks read or don't read my post, but rather to obtain input on what drives others to abstain from reading something and then tell the author they didn't read it. In the digital world, folks manage to not read all sorts of things and they go on with their life, never sharing that they didn't read the document. What is different about public forums, this forum, that folks don't do the same?
Their are many different levels if friendship. Some people even consider their pets to be family. It's an emotional thing.Have you ever actually -owned- a dog?
Ages ago, yes. My ex wife got the dog. LOL I loved the dog, but I am on the road well over 200 days a year and I think dogs need more attention than I have time to give them.
Yep. They are definitely pretty high maintenance, but they can also be very good friends, in my view
Wow. You and I have very different conceptions of what it means to be a friend. I think pets, dogs in particular, make good companions. That's it.
3 short sentences in previous post. No need to "fully develop" with examples and references to other works as if submitting an assignment to a lit professor. If needed such development will happen through the discussion format of the message board.Their are many different levels if friendship. Some people even consider their pets to be family. It's an emotional thing.Have you ever actually -owned- a dog?
Ages ago, yes. My ex wife got the dog. LOL I loved the dog, but I am on the road well over 200 days a year and I think dogs need more attention than I have time to give them.
Yep. They are definitely pretty high maintenance, but they can also be very good friends, in my view
Wow. You and I have very different conceptions of what it means to be a friend. I think pets, dogs in particular, make good companions. That's it.
Their are many different levels if friendship. Some people even consider their pets to be family. It's an emotional thing.Have you ever actually -owned- a dog?
Ages ago, yes. My ex wife got the dog. LOL I loved the dog, but I am on the road well over 200 days a year and I think dogs need more attention than I have time to give them.
Yep. They are definitely pretty high maintenance, but they can also be very good friends, in my view
Wow. You and I have very different conceptions of what it means to be a friend. I think pets, dogs in particular, make good companions. That's it.
. I have no pets of my own, but I love my sister's dog, have taken care of him for her when she's gone away in the past. I have a somewhat more difficult relationship with my mother's dog, but I still love her in spite of this, we just, well, argue a bit sometimes (I also argue with my mother; I suspect this is not a coincidence ).3 short sentences in previous post. No need to "fully develop" with examples and references to other works as if submitting an assignment to a lit professor. If needed such development will happen through the discussion format of the message board.Their are many different levels if friendship. Some people even consider their pets to be family. It's an emotional thing.Have you ever actually -owned- a dog?
Ages ago, yes. My ex wife got the dog. LOL I loved the dog, but I am on the road well over 200 days a year and I think dogs need more attention than I have time to give them.
Yep. They are definitely pretty high maintenance, but they can also be very good friends, in my view
Wow. You and I have very different conceptions of what it means to be a friend. I think pets, dogs in particular, make good companions. That's it.
If they are truly so bothered by your long posts, they too can put you on ignore and they can simply move on to posts that are of a shorter length.
