Moderation Questions
The last iteration of the moderation discussion thread was a complete disaster. Numerous attempts to keep it on topic fa
It's ridiculous what this thread has become. Is there not a low content thread for people to talk nonsense in? This thread should be dedicated to moderation related issues. I remember a time when moderators would redirect the discussion back to strictly moderation talk. What changed? I have a theory. The nonsense talk was introduced and encouraged because a certain moderator w
A friendly reminder that this bipolar mess of a human being has used this thread prior to this post for the following:
1. Giving out chaturb8 tips nobody asked for
2. ‘Is it weird she didn’t put out when I painted?’
3. ‘Is it weird she didn’t put out when I paid for her ****?’
4. Giving out onlyfans subscription advice nobody asked for and how to pick up women by setting them up on onlyfans so they can paint nude
5. Rageposting random crap in between his random demands at moderation attacking his perceived enemies
A friendly reminder that this bipolar mess of a human being has used this thread prior to this post for the following:1. Giving out chaturb8 tips nobody asked for2. ‘Is it weird she didn’t put out when I painted?’3. ‘Is it weird she didn’t put out when I paid for her ****?’4. Giving out onlyfans subscription advice nobody asked for and how to pick up women by setting them up on
All that is a lot more entertaining than you just ranting fwiw.
Settle down, uncle tom
If your issues were literally completely ignored then you have a legitimate complaint.
But if what you mean by 'my issues were completely ignored' means 'my issues weren't settled to my satisfaction', that's a different claim.
Which is it?
One issue I had that wasn't settled to my satisfaction is that a poster here called me a "Subhuman date rapist". I just want to know if this is allowed. I think I remember somebody getting temp banned for calling another poster "subhuman". It might have been me. Also, is it allowed to accuse someone of rape or date rape without any evidence or realistic reason to believe this has happened?
It doesn't bother me but you asked.
A friendly reminder that this bipolar mess of a human being has used this thread prior to this post for the following:1. Giving out chaturb8 tips nobody asked for2. ‘Is it weird she didn’t put out when I painted?’3. ‘Is it weird she didn’t put out when I paid for her ****?’4. Giving out onlyfans subscription advice nobody asked for and how to
If my posts are "rage posts" how would you describe your all capital letter profanity laden name calling posts?
One issue I had that wasn't settled to my satisfaction is that a poster here called me a "Subhuman date rapist". I just want to know if this is allowed. I think I remember somebody getting temp banned for calling another poster "subhuman". It might have been me. Also, is it allowed to accuse someone of rape or date rape without any evidence or realistic reason to believe this
This was answered. You responded in kind; nobody was banned for it at the time.
As far as you posting about your experiences with women, yes, I’m absolutely going to allow other posters to criticize your behavior. Nobody is making any legal accusations- they’re describing how you sound in your posts. If you don’t want people to say that you sound rapey, maybe consider not posting things that sound coercive and creepy.
Tl,dr If you think I’m going to protect you from that particular criticism, you are ****ing dreaming
The majority of grammar is made up by people who enjoy arbitrary rules, just like the majority of society's expectations are made up by people who woke up early and decided upon them while the rest of us were sleeping. Which is why a good bottle of wine is much harder to find in the middle of the night than in the middle of the day. Which, if you think about it, makes very litt
I would distinguish between GrammarTM and the study of grammar. Of course there will be a “correct” way of writing things based on convention, but there won’t be a “correct” way of speaking when various linguistic disciplines (it’s pretty interdisciplinary, spanning race studies, gender studies, anthropology, sociology, philosophy, and linguistics proper) observe the spoken and casually written forms of grammar and assign them certain emergent patterns.
One example of this could be the prominence of so-called “pidgin”, “creole”, or “ebonics”, which are all primarily spoken forms but have also seen developments in writing due to mass access to the internet.
Linguists prefer the term AAVE fwiw
“ “Vernacular English” in AAVE situates the variety within the family of English dialects. This framing underscores that AAVE is a rule-governed, legitimate dialect of English, not “slang” or “broken English.” “
My brother. You keep referencing the Latin.
My grandmother, well, she wrote the book on it. She was literally a professor of Latin till he died this summer at 99. Like, this woman wrote textbooks.
You could probably make a half-decent wedge from a successful Latin schools primer, back in the day.
This was answered. You responded in kind; nobody was banned for it at the time. As far as you posting about your experiences with women, yes, I’m absolutely going to allow other posters to criticize your behavior. Nobody is making any legal accusations- they’re describing how you sound in your posts. If you don’t want people to say that you sound rapey, maybe consider not post
The issue is that you and some others have created the "rape" narrative based off out of context discussion.
Funny how nobody else seems to have that issue
Maybe we should step away from the rapist narrative and move towards the "mong is a Trump loving neonazi" narrative.
Not most of it, no. Language has, and has to have, a certain logic, otherwise we would just communicate in grunts and heavy blows with blunt instruments. (Although, looking at this forum sometimes, maybe we do.) But there are a few catch-you-out snobbisms which are pretty arbitrary, like the infamous supposed rule against the split infinitive, which was only invented becau
Our languages are far older than our formal grammar rules. Those rules are derived from language, not imposed on language. We could perhaps have a Chomskyesque debate on whether grammar exists in the form of archetypal syntax before it is formalized or language internalized, but that is far beyond my point.
So we know from the past that we were able to communicate just fine without formalized grammar. We could perhaps have a debate on whether we communicated worse, but that is a tough discussion with so many confounding variables involved that it is far trickier debate than it first appears to be.
I would say that the biggest bonus of formalized grammar is for schooling and education purposes, which again makes a literate populace easier to achieve.
I would distinguish between GrammarTM and the study of grammar. Of course there will be a “correct” way of writing things based on convention, but there won’t be a “correct” way of speaking when various linguistic disciplines (it’s pretty interdisciplinary, spanning race studies, gender studies, anthropology, sociology, philosophy, and lingui
This understanding of grammar would be the dominant way to see the subject today (terminology non-withstanding), but the majority of formal grammar is hand-me-downs from centuries past, and in some cases millennia. The people deciding which conventions were correct all those hundreds of years ago were rarely men of the people to begin with, even though some honorable exceptions apply.
Even representative rules of grammar can be a problem though. As language develops and evolves like it always does, language and its formal grammar can drift apart. That is when you get heated discussions between adherents of formal grammar and people who just speak or write the language they learned. In discussion that center around common grammar central to how sentences are formed I usually sympathize with adherents of grammar, it keeps us speaking the same language. In discussions that center around obscure grammar rules or grammar that is focused on minutia, I sympathize more with language's tendency to drift.
All this said, my first post on the issue was facetious for comedy's sake.
Our languages are far older than our formal grammar rules. Those rules are derived from language, not imposed on language. We could perhaps have a Chomskyesque debate on whether grammar exists in the form of archetypal syntax before it is formalized or language internalized, but that is far beyond my point. So we know from the past that we were able to communicate just fine wi
What you guys are discussing is the difference between descriptive vs prescriptive grammar. Linguists care about the former and people like D2 care about the latter.
I’ve asked you guys repeatedly not to do this, so now I have to do some #consistency. SRM will take the day off.
Is this the part where I’m supposed to spam the thread for 200 posts about how unfair you are?
Anyway, sorry, wasn’t trying to be offensive was only trying to mock mongo
What you guys are discussing is the difference between descriptive vs prescriptive grammar. Linguists care about the former and people like D2 care about the latter.
Amazingly you said all of these words in their exact order and have the literal audacity to criticize someone’s entertainment value
I can’t find a gif for this but just fast forward to the part about ****ing off to the mountains and know that’s my message to you
Amazingly you said all of these words in their exact order and have the literal audacity to criticize someone’s entertainment valueI can’t find a gif for this but just fast forward to the part about ****ing off to the mountains and know that’s my message to you
I wasn't talking to you. Stop being a weirdo and go try to do something productive.
