On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 21:35:41 -0400, Saul Luizaga <sau### [at] netscapenet> 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