|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 21:35:41 -0400, Saul Luizaga <sau### [at] netscape net> wrote:
>OK, I'm answering everyone in this post:
>I may sound juvenile because I wrote a lot in a juvenile game forum and
>Stephen what I was quoting was from the article u offered a link to, so
>I don't see why it sounded juvenile.
I did not realise it was a quote. I thought that it was your own words, so that
is why I thought that it was a juvenile retort.
As to the quote, I hardly think that someone who is described as a "slang
lexicographer" is unbiased. :) <--? (SMS icon)
There is a whole debate going on (in the UK, at least) about what is acceptable
in written English not including the acceptability of non British English.
>Also I can't believe somebody actually got insulted by this type of
>abbreviations, I actually don't see the logic of the "insult".
I did not feel insulted I did not like the implications of what I obviously
misread when you said "but here most ppl presume of making intellectual
milestones writing or discovering intellectual interesting stuff and mostly as a
show-off of their mental capacity". To me it read as if you were complaining
that some people were using big words to show off. But that is a reason to write
properly so that what you want to say is understood the way that you want it to
be. IMO
>Was my
>post saying: you are dumb because you who have fought dyslexia can't
>read it? If so, I never even got close to mention dyslexia people,
No it wasn't. I just take a lot of care that when I post I generally check the
context and spelling. I envy people who can write directly without needing to
check first.
>since I assume smart people don't have a problem with
>this kind Internet slang, let alone knowing some people here had a won
>battle against dyslexia. I apology for the mistake.
Apology accepted and lets not make too much of it, please.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |