How do you find a good guy

Depends on which side of the pond, Luv.

ty...i never knew that until pep enlightened me....

Look under the bar stool at 2AM!

I did last night.

Pep (All I found was 3Ring, passed out in a pool of vomit)

Okay. Thank you for clarifying. I haven't seen this in your posts before. It's possible it was in a thread I didn't see, or before I joined the forums, or that I read it but simply don't remember.

But I was thinking of the posts in which you've criticised native English speakers' grammar or punctuation or spelling.

I suppose people could ward off some of the corrections or perhaps lessen miscommunication (your point if I understand it, is that people would then be more likely to take more time interpreting the post in question and/or ask a question?) by posting a hurdle such as dyslexia or the fact that English is not their native language in a sigline or profile. But, some may be shy about that, some may feel too embarrassed, but also some may simply feel it's not our concern. Lastly, some may simply not care. :/

There is also a strong possibility that even native English speakers may not realise their mistakes. Communication is a skill, clear communication is a talent, and education worldwide varies, er, widely. I'll be darned if I know what a gerund is, and I tend toward the commonspeak or vernacular as far as word choices (I know that isn't your complaint per se; your word choices are often 'common' in the best sense also). My sentence structure is idiosyncratic. But then I also won an award doing exactly that...

Finally, some find the public pointing-out of their errors to be humiliating. People react differently to any stimulus. Some find humiliation exciting, some find it helpful, if it stings a bit at first; and some find it counter productive.

I suppose I have learned to skim past all but the most egregious grammatical and other such errors, which may be a sad commentary all around, but then, forums and chat rooms and such use the vernacular form more so than the King's English. People seem to 'relax' more when not having to monitor their posts to that degree.

I do appreciate the efficiency and neatness of your posts, but most people will never write in the same form. As hard as I sometimes try (and you do raise the bar in that way), I know I make at least a handful of errors per post, myself.

(FWIW) I don't disagree with your standard, I just see it as standing in a rainstorm on a muddy hill. It's only if it gets a bit personal on either end that I disagree with it - otherwise, everyone has the right to their own opinion/reaction/feeling on the topic. I think a lot of people are not used to speaking that way let alone typing that way, and revert to what they are used to as a matter of course in a fast moving forum or text chat.

I criticise not simply ESLers but *everyone* who posts badly formed arguments and expects other readers to be telepathic. It is a form of arrogance much more insidious and insulting than that imputed upon those who point out the errors of others in the hope of improvement.

Obviously, dyslexics and ESLers have reasons for their posts having errors, but many get upset when the diluting effect of these is pointed out because they think it is discriminatory or intolerant, which attitude is discriminatory and intolerant in itself.

EFLers who make mistakes because they are poorly educated or (worse) lazy, tend to counter-attack, attempting to make their own weaknesses strengths, suggesting that their own lack of clarity is only a result of the pedantry of the "over-intellectual".

You combine together forums and chat rooms for the purpose of your argument. I differentiate them. People that talk to me inworld are astonished to find that I seem to be less concerned about the standard of English used in our conversations than they are! Different standards are appropriate to different communications channels - but this forum is supposedly for offering solutions to problems, and to do so effectively is simplified if the requests and the responses are clearly comprehensible. That is difficult to achieve, given the diversity of the participants, but it should not mean that everyone should not be exhorted to try to do the best they can! Sorry about that double negative by the way - I am trying to emphasise my point and sometimes strictly ungrammatical constructions, used intentionally, can be effective.

Oh, and if you want to know what *really* upsets me, it is when I write something that is clear as crystal, and some over-emotional, over-reacting idiot allows preconceptions to cloud their eyes and their judgment and sees something that is not actually there; then one of their allies reads only the critic's post (without referring to the original) and joins a deluded bandwagon - but that's forums for you!

Pep (I haven't seen the news - has Elizabeth passed away and Charles ascended the throne? )

How appropriate that you should quote John Donne in your signature for this post. One needs only to look at every other line of any of his writings to see how much English is in flux. If someone used the word "stablish" in a post, would they be corrected I wonder. Or worse, how about the word "who're?" Both of these words are in Donne's poem "The Indifferent"

I looked that up more or less at random. I'm not trying to come across as all that erudite. I'm just agreeing with your thoughtful post.

Who knows, maybe someday "alot" will be added to the dictionary.

It's there already. But you have missed out an "l".

Pep (I am all for linguistic change, but not laziness or incompetence)

Corrected to circumvent sloth.

Stating your language skills in your profile is a very good idea. It helps to prevent misunderstandings. My SL profile lists my native language, and then English, as my second one. (There is nothing to be embarassed about if you know several languages fluently.)

Nor even if you are not fluent, actually.

Pep (How about your forum profile?)

A bit late to the thread, but this I totally agree with.

The thing I seem to have trouble with, is guys that keep doing the last part of that paragraph. In rl I'm happily married to a wonderful guy who has no issue at all with my SL relationships, but can I find a guy in here wants the same as I do ? It seems not.

The majority of men I've had a relationship with in SL will tell you they're 'one women men' but the reality is far from that. They're like kids in a sweet shop half the time, and they just can't keep their lil' paws out of that jar..

oh cmon...we all know pep just does it to get attention....and look at how effective it is...

batting my eyelashes....

She did not get sick.

So who's the marketing consultant round here then?

Pep (Praise indeed)

so what exactly are you marketing pep...lol maybe some wormwood and gall...hehe

Well, you tell me what it is that you find so fascinating.

Pep (or is it just my NLP that mesmerises you)

noooo..NLP is soooo 70's...i prefer gestalt....BE the cucumber...

Well, if it isn't my NLP powers then it must be my innate mesmeric talents.

Pep (Are you feeling sleepy?)

I mentioned this before and I shall mention it again... my posts suck, I typo, I am rarely clear on what I am trying to say, and I frequently confuse myself, yet... you rarely correct my posts...

not that I am complaining, just wanted to clarify that not everyone who posts badly formed arguments etc, are "corrected" by you.

Feel free to start doing so with my posts anytime, because, I shamefully admit, I suck at grammar and spelling, and I do learn things from you pep, even if you are an insufferable bore. I still do learn even from insufferable bores. Although admittedly I could do without the personal snide attacks you seem to like to throw at some specific posters. That actually lowers your intelligence in my viewpoint. It is like a fifth grader explaining something, even though they have it right, it is still childish and they tend to stoop to "name calling".

Try doing it without insulting folks, or randomly being a fifth grader level of mentality to others.

(Or not, it is up to you of course. I was bored just felt like typing something. Enjoy ripping it apart so you can correct mistakes, I eagerly await learning something new)

Sorry Rha, but as with FD, I don't usually pay much attention to your posts, as they generally tend to ramble on without saying much that impinges upon or antagonises me.

In fact, if you look carefully, I hardly ever "correct" anyone's posts. People tend to get disproportionately upset when I do though, so it gets noticed. Such is life.

Pep (By the way, you can't really find me "insufferable", or you would not suffer me. )

Well - is it arrogance if they are unaware of their mistakes?

I don't disagree, again, that clarity is good and posts that much be deciphered make it more difficult. I tend to just skip the ones that are too unintelligible. Btw I don't recall saying you were discriminatory or intolerant. (To be honest though I just came in quickly from email notifications, while a bit low blood sugar, and so I may have; am not at my sharpest most likely at the moment.)

What you say may be true but why the personal attacks/vehemence at times. No one of us has been appointed to police the others' posts, after all. Yes, when I see a dash of mockery or name calling I presume some annoyance on the part of the author, although it may be another linguistic exercise on their (i.e. your) part. I could buy that.

Yes I combine forums and chat rooms, because I think there is carryover. As you point out in the post yourself, while intended to be a help forum this has become a bit chattier and 'looser' (my words). I think AOL chat rooms did a lot to dent the lexicon. And for many this forum seems a hangout, a chat room in effect. So the same 'rules' seem to apply here, for many I think, as in live (SL/RL) chat or a chat room. It wasn't to say the two *should* be the same, necessarily.



I agree (if that is part of your point) that denigrating someone's education as "overmuch" is as bad as denigrating the lack of one. Who can do or say more than they know at the time they do or say it?



If the first paragraph in quote above refers to my interpretation - for what it's worth I wasn't emotional at all when I wrote my brief post in the thread here.

I fear the parenthetical quip is over my head.

Language is a beautiful thing.

Shakespeare made up his own words at times when it suited.

If they continue to post in a similar manner after their deficiencies have been pointed out, I would say it is.

I only get personal *after* the other has taken an ad hominem stance. Sauce for the goose . . .

I understood your position, but wanted to say that this is a Q&A forum and if someone asks "what is the result if you add a big number to a little number?" they are not going to get sensible answers, and that anybody who answers "948" is being speciously (in)accurate.

Quite.

It wasn't directed at you. Your posts here seem clear and rational.

You alluded to the King's English, rather than the Queen's.

Pep (Thinking of taking a rest and watching what happens)

Ah! Okeydokey. Clearly explained/understood.