| Author | Post |
|---|
jbone
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jun 4th, 2008 |
| Location: | Arlington, WA |
| Posts: | 345 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 11th, 2008 07:43 pm |
|
Dave_pro2a wrote: antispam540 wrote: /rantOn
PLEASE, if we're sending letters to people who have authority, use CORRECT SPELLING AND GRAMMAR. It makes us look like rednecks/hillbillies when we DON'T use it correctly, and it sets us apart from the "unwashed masses" when we DO use it correctly.
"Your" is not the same as "You're". "You're" is short for "you are". "Your" is used to show possession, ie. "It's your car, not mine."
Apostrophes mean possession, so don't say "citizen's" unless you mean that something belongs to the citizen. If you're talking about more than one citizen's possession(s), put the apostrophe after the last letter.
"This law applies to all citizens' guns." - Multiple citizens.
"This law applies to a citizen's guns" - One citizen.
"This law is applied to the guns of citizens" - No possession, so don't use an apostrophe!
"Its" is not the same as "It's"
"Its" means possession (it's an exception to the normal apostrophe rules)
"It's" is short for "it is"
I will be happy to proofread and/or edit any letter or correspondence you want to send. I can't guarantee I will be 100% accurate, but every little bit helps. If not me, then get at least someone to proofread it for you. Thank you.
/rantOff
Gee, you aren't insinuating that LIBTARD POLITICIANS ignore anyone who doesn't use proper spelling and grammar? Are you?
The Greennik treehuggers would never stoop so low as to essentially disenfranchise a large part of the population... would they?
Aren't the supposed to be the friend of the poor, the uneducated, the drug addicted, the ex-felon, the chronically stupid and idiotic, the high school drop-out teenage single mothers?
Gee, if the ignore a citizen due to spelling and grammar, then it just exposes them as the bigoted, self-rightious, prejudiced a-holes that they are. And it would alienate their base 
Ya know, the damn idiotic liberals control education in this state... so they are just reaping the reward for their failures in that area.
Dave_pro2a Thanks for sticking up. I am the undereducated, underpaid, chronically stupid and idiotic slob. For this I have a girl in every port, helps me to forget.
|
Roy Hobbs
Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 11th, 2008 08:25 pm |
|
Ravenhawk wrote: Roy Hobbs wrote: Ravenhawk wrote: How far away are we from this?
Called "Bully Boys" part of Hitlers Nazi party were basicly Police.
I wish that we could get away from automatically equating every attempt to limit our right to defend ourselves as the next incarnation of the Nazi party. The US in 2008 is not even close to the Weimar republic in the 1930's.
Stuff like this does not help with people who are on the fence. It just makes us look bad.
In my conversations with my friends, and others who are in favor of limiting guns in the name of "security", I never, ever go to the extremes. Instead, I point out that if you look at the Bill of Rights, the 2nd amendment comes before the ones about self-incrimination and due process and state's rights and all the others. The founders were pretty smart guys, and there is probably a reason for the order that they picked.
Vigilant about ensuring that rights stay that way? Absolutely. But remain sensitive to the fact that others automatically turn off when you jump to the worst-case scenario.
Ya well if this goes unchallenged then whats next?
1 yr from now gun incident on bus - BAN CARRYING ON PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION?
2 yr from now gun incident inside restraunt - NO GUN IN EATERY'S?
3 yr from now gun incident at workplace - NO GUNS AT PLACE EMPLOYMENT?
4 yr from now gun incident 7-11 @ 3:00AM = NO GUNS IN PLACE WITH MONEY ATER 2AM?
5 yr from now gun incident on your private property .... get the picture?
Newsflash - there is no "in-between" either we can carry in PUBLIC places like Seattle Center or any Seattle facilities or we can't. Seattle Police doing search's for Legal Pistol carriers at "Seattle facilities" would come across as Nazi's or like the topic starter implied make Seattle look like Baghdad.
Hitler started his takeover plans in his own Country disarming the mass's ... Im definately not implying it would go as far as the Hitler regime did with War but don't piss down my back and tell me it's not raining by ignoring or playing down the similarities.
I full understand your point but obviously have different approach.
Just to be clear, I do understand your point. Incremental erosion of rights cannot be allowed to occur, because of what it can lead to (i.e. the 1-5 year scenario you laid out.)
We're all on the same side here; I'm just pointing out how it looks to someone on the outside looking in, and trying to remind everyone that the way in which a message is communicated is just as important, and possibly more important, than the content of the message itself. If we want to win, we need to take that into consideration.
|
Tawnos
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jun 4th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 40 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 11th, 2008 08:39 pm |
|
Antispam is correct, though. As a college educated person, I tend to hold those writings written in a grammatically incorrect fashion to a lower degree than those which do not. Misuse of apostrophes, spelling errors, and other such things makes the writer come off as either unintelligent or uncaring. In trying to get a political message out, NEITHER of these things are acceptable.
Think about it from the perspective of the mayor, also likely college educated. He has a viewpoint that says "I should remove guns from citizens who are not capable enough to handle them." I imagine that letters containing numerous spelling or grammatical mistakes say to him that those who support guns are too stupid to know any better. Moreover, I am guessing that he'll see unwillingness to use even a basic editorial read-through says to him "the person doesn't care enough to write properly, why would they care enough to handle a weapon properly?"
In trying to promote change or betterment, it's important not to run about dropping derogatory names (libtards, greeniks, hippies, what have you) in trying to show the "inferiority" of the "other side".
Here's the easiest first step, apostrophes (brought to you by Bob, the Angry Flower):
Last edited on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 08:40 pm by Tawnos
|
Bear 45/70
Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 11th, 2008 08:55 pm |
|
Tawnos wrote: Antispam is correct, though. As a college educated person, I tend to hold those writings written in a grammatically incorrect fashion to a lower degree than those which do not. Misuse of apostrophes, spelling errors, and other such things makes the writer come off as either unintelligent or uncaring. In trying to get a political message out, NEITHER of these things are acceptable.
Think about it from the perspective of the mayor, also likely college educated. He has a viewpoint that says "I should remove guns from citizens who are not capable enough to handle them." I imagine that letters containing numerous spelling or grammatical mistakes say to him that those who support guns are too stupid to know any better. Moreover, I am guessing that he'll see unwillingness to use even a basic editorial read-through says to him "the person doesn't care enough to write properly, why would they care enough to handle a weapon properly?"
In trying to promote change or betterment, it's important not to run about dropping derogatory names (libtards, greeniks, hippies, what have you) in trying to show the "inferiority" of the "other side".
Here's the easiest first step, apostrophes (brought to you by Bob, the Angry Flower):
Elitism raises it's ugly head on a gun forum. The bad part is I agree but find that learning the rules again at my age just isn't gonna happen. If you discount what a person has to say because of their lack of education, then you are by definition and "Elitist" and a bigot. FYI, my spell check accepted "gonna" so explain that.
|
jbone
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jun 4th, 2008 |
| Location: | Arlington, WA |
| Posts: | 345 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 11th, 2008 09:14 pm |
|
Tawnos wrote: "I tend to hold those writings written in a grammatically incorrect fashion to a lower degree than those which do not. Misuse of apostrophes, spelling errors, and other such things makes the writer come off as either unintelligent or uncaring"
"Think about it from the perspective of the mayor, also likely college educated. He has a viewpoint that says "I should remove guns from citizens who are not capable enough to handle them." I imagine that letters containing numerous spelling or grammatical mistakes say to him that those who support guns are too stupid to know any better. Moreover, I am guessing that he'll see unwillingness to use even a basic editorial read-through says to him "the person doesn't care enough to write properly, why would they care enough to handle a weapon properly?"
In my 23 years military and handing the M10, 1911, M9, M14/16, 12 Gauge, and my favorite the XM218 aircraft .50 cal, am I hearing there are those that would feel that if one can't spell they can't handle a gun.? I can't spell and my grammar sucks but I can hit a nag’s ass, and safer with a weapon than most I knew.
So, we have the Left trying to remove our rights and now the Right saying to not exercise "Freedom of Speech. I'm very sure the fat cats with all the degrees realize that their citizens come form a large cross section of society. I was born the son of a Cop, not an English teacher or politician with the silver spoon in mouth. I refuse to be told not to express my views or thoughts in this country I serve.
I know it's just your observation and not a message to those with out formal education to stiffle?
|
jbone
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jun 4th, 2008 |
| Location: | Arlington, WA |
| Posts: | 345 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 11th, 2008 09:19 pm |
|
Bear 45/70 wrote: Tawnos wrote: Antispam is correct, though. As a college educated person, I tend to hold those writings written in a grammatically incorrect fashion to a lower degree than those which do not. Misuse of apostrophes, spelling errors, and other such things makes the writer come off as either unintelligent or uncaring. In trying to get a political message out, NEITHER of these things are acceptable.
Think about it from the perspective of the mayor, also likely college educated. He has a viewpoint that says "I should remove guns from citizens who are not capable enough to handle them." I imagine that letters containing numerous spelling or grammatical mistakes say to him that those who support guns are too stupid to know any better. Moreover, I am guessing that he'll see unwillingness to use even a basic editorial read-through says to him "the person doesn't care enough to write properly, why would they care enough to handle a weapon properly?"
In trying to promote change or betterment, it's important not to run about dropping derogatory names (libtards, greeniks, hippies, what have you) in trying to show the "inferiority" of the "other side".
Here's the easiest first step, apostrophes (brought to you by Bob, the Angry Flower):
Elitism raises it's ugly head on a gun forum. The bad part is I agree but find that learning the rules again at my age just isn't gonna happen. If you discount what a person has to say because of their lack of education, then you are by definition and "Elitist" and a bigot. FYI, my spell check accepted "gonna" so explain that.
You have Microsoft's "rednecks/hillbillies" version of WORD. I have that there won also, I'm satisfied with it. I am what I am.
Last edited on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 09:21 pm by jbone
|
Tawnos
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jun 4th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 40 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 11th, 2008 09:20 pm |
|
Bear 45/70 wrote
Elitism raises it's ugly head on a gun forum. The bad part is I agree but find that learning the rules again at my age just isn't gonna happen. If you discount what a person has to say because of their lack of education, then you are by definition and "Elitist" and a bigot. FYI, my spell check accepted "gonna" so explain that.
It's not a matter of being elitist. It's understanding who you're dealing with. If it's bigoted to recognize that, than give me a sign, I'm an elitist bigot. However, I think you should understand that I'm ON YOUR SIDE. You don't want to relearn English? Fine, I'll help clean it up for you. Doing so benefits both of us, as you're more likely to be taken seriously by elitist bigots who sign executive orders.
As for gonna, it's slang that exists in the unabridged dictionary, and it's in common enough usage that many dictionaries have it.
As an edit:
When did it become admirable to exult in one's own ignorance? Why do people take it as a badge of honor to exclaim "I'm a simple man who doesn't need your fancy schooling!"? If you're on a forum who has a large primary mission of education (about the legality of open carry), it seems ironic to turn around and speak from an anti-education standpoint. Why am I called the bigot, when you're also looking down on me for expecting people not to abuse their mother tongue?
Last edited on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 09:26 pm by Tawnos
|
jbone
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jun 4th, 2008 |
| Location: | Arlington, WA |
| Posts: | 345 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 11th, 2008 09:25 pm |
|
Tawnos wrote: Doing so benefits both of us, as you're more likely to be taken seriously by elitist bigots who sign .
Retuning back to original subject. Illegal executive order.
|
Bear 45/70
Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 11th, 2008 09:30 pm |
|
Tawnos wrote: Bear 45/70 wrote
Elitism raises it's ugly head on a gun forum. The bad part is I agree but find that learning the rules again at my age just isn't gonna happen. If you discount what a person has to say because of their lack of education, then you are by definition and "Elitist" and a bigot. FYI, my spell check accepted "gonna" so explain that.
It's not a matter of being elitist. It's understanding who you're dealing with. If it's bigoted to recognize that, than give me a sign, I'm an elitist bigot. However, I think you should understand that I'm ON YOUR SIDE. You don't want to relearn English? Fine, I'll help clean it up for you. Doing so benefits both of us, as you're more likely to be taken seriously by elitist bigots who sign executive orders.
As for gonna, it's slang that exists in the unabridged dictionary, and it's in common enough usage that many dictionaries have it.
Please show where I said anything about anyone here not being on the gun rights side? But I do find anyone that has the attitude that just because someone else isn't up to their writing skill level as a lesser person to be an elitist. Not everyone in the world has a BA or even an AA. Actually I would expect that those with a college education would be in the minority. So what the standard really should be is what is what the average person in this country has for a writing level.
|
Bear 45/70
Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 11th, 2008 09:33 pm |
|
jbone wrote: Tawnos wrote: Doing so benefits both of us, as you're more likely to be taken seriously by elitist bigots who sign .
Retuning back to original subject. Illegal executive order.
What is it with you guys and your paranoia abot a thread taking a turn to a different subject? Conversations do it all the time and is normal. FYI, anything said here will have no effect on what happens with the executive order.
|
Tawnos
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jun 4th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 40 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 11th, 2008 09:35 pm |
|
Yes, illegal executive orders. Orders which must be fought both in a court of law and of public opinion. Fought when talking to people who not only have undergraduate degrees, but also formal training in the use of language as a tool and a weapon. In the court of public opinion, how often do you hear someone criticized for spelling correctly and using correct grammar? How often is it the other way around, where someone who speaks incorrectly gets corrected? How do you think the public responds when, on one side, there is a group of people who attended college, dress nicely, speak well, et cetera; on the other side are people who can't be bothered, exult in not speaking correctly, and, while they may have served in the military, are not currently in another country at war? Who do you think John Q Public is going to take more seriously, or listen to more closely when the subject of rule of law is brought up.
Again: I'm on your side, and I agree the order is both illegal and should be fought from every direction possible. What I'm saying is this: don't shoot yourself in the proverbial foot by your unwillingness to beat them at their own game.
|
Tawnos
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jun 4th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 40 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 11th, 2008 09:40 pm |
|
Bear 45/70 wrote:
Please show where I said anything about anyone here not being on the gun rights side? But I do find anyone that has the attitude that just because someone else isn't up to their writing skill level as a lesser person to be an elitist. Not everyone in the world has a BA or even an AA. Actually I would expect that those with a college education would be in the minority. So what the standard really should be is what is what the average person in this country has for a writing level.
The reminder is that, if I'm an elitist bigot, I'm one that's on the side of gun rights. Even though you can argue about the standard "should be" (and I can disagree, but that's a topic for another time), that does not change the facts of the situation. The standard you're dealing with is politician - somebody who has a bachelor's (and I'm a BS, not a BA - computer engineering), masters, doctorate, et cetera. A person who knows the intricacies of language, and uses them daily.
This is who you need to acknowledge is your target, and trying to meet them without using "elitist" language is like going toe to toe with the Navy using a rowboat. You might make your point, but it will be a small splotch on the side of a much bigger picture.
|
kparker
Member
| Joined: | Fri Nov 10th, 2006 |
| Location: | Washington USA |
| Posts: | 479 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 11th, 2008 09:57 pm |
|
now the Right saying to not exercise Freedom of Speech
Uhh, who on "the Right" (or, actually, the pro-gun-rights side) said that?
I did see someone saying before you speak, you would help yourself and your cause if you did some editing first, but that's not the same thing as saying don't speak.
|
Tawnos
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jun 4th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 40 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 11th, 2008 10:10 pm |
|
kparker wrote: now the Right saying to not exercise Freedom of Speech
Uhh, who on "the Right" (or, actually, the pro-gun-rights side) said that?
I did see someone saying before you speak, you would help yourself and your cause if you did some editing first, but that's not the same thing as saying don't speak.
Hit the nail on the head. If you want to talk in a fashion that indicates lack of concern or ability in wielding the English language, be my guest. However, it behooves you and our cause to speak in a fashion that doesn't trigger an immediate response of disregard from those you're trying to address. I mean Mayor Nickels, not me - I obviously am willing to engage in discourse over an issue. However, he may not because of perceived ignorance.
|
thewise1
Member
| Joined: | Fri Oct 19th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 205 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 11th, 2008 10:21 pm |
|
Mistakes happen, but it's so incredibly important to make sure you don't give the enemy any easy methods to ridicule your message - without addressing it - that I can't possibly emphasize it enough.
It's one thing to type quickly on an internet forum. I'm not trying to be the grammar police and most people don't want to be such either.
However, it's important to realize that if you send a letter that says "I can haz gunz, libtard", these things are likely to be shared with the public as a reason that the public should vote against your individual right to keep and bear arms.
There will be no fair trial in the court of public opinion. All that will matter is their perception of your message and intellect, however unfair that may be. Much like I don't particularly enjoy wearing a business suit and tie to work, I do it because if I don't, some clients will not find a young man like myself to be as credible if I'm wearing jeans and a t-shirt. Perception is incredibly important. Don't let them use it against you.
Speak your mind, but if you know you've got a problem with grammar and the ability to make a logical, calm point, at least have someone proofread it before you send it. Consider the backlash of the things you say. A polite letter will always get a better result than an angry, unintelligible, rude, letter.
Call me an elitist, a bigot, whatever you want, these are facts of life whether you like it or not.
PS - This public service announcement is not directed at anyone specifically, just a general attempt at helpfulness.
|
SicSemperTyrannis
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jun 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 437 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 11th, 2008 10:29 pm |
|
thewise1 wrote: Mistakes happen, but it's so incredibly important to make sure you don't give the enemy any easy methods to ridicule your message - without addressing it - that I can't possibly emphasize it enough.
It's one thing to type quickly on an internet forum. I'm not trying to be the grammar police and most people don't want to be such either.
However, it's important to realize that if you send a letter that says "I can haz gunz, libtard", these things are likely to be shared with the public as a reason that the public should vote against your individual right to keep and bear arms.
There will be no fair trial in the court of public opinion. All that will matter is their perception of your message and intellect, however unfair that may be. Much like I don't particularly enjoy wearing a business suit and tie to work, I do it because if I don't, some clients will not find a young man like myself to be as credible if I'm wearing jeans and a t-shirt. Perception is incredibly important. Don't let them use it against you.
Speak your mind, but if you know you've got a problem with grammar and the ability to make a logical, calm point, at least have someone proofread it before you send it. Consider the backlash of the things you say. A polite letter will always get a better result than an angry, unintelligible, rude, letter.
Call me an elitist, a bigot, whatever you want, these are facts of life whether you like it or not.
PS - This public service announcement is not directed at anyone specifically, just a general attempt at helpfulness.
Very well put. Amen.
|
Bear 45/70
Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 11th, 2008 10:36 pm |
|
SicSemperTyrannis wrote: thewise1 wrote: Mistakes happen, but it's so incredibly important to make sure you don't give the enemy any easy methods to ridicule your message - without addressing it - that I can't possibly emphasize it enough.
It's one thing to type quickly on an internet forum. I'm not trying to be the grammar police and most people don't want to be such either.
However, it's important to realize that if you send a letter that says "I can haz gunz, libtard", these things are likely to be shared with the public as a reason that the public should vote against your individual right to keep and bear arms.
There will be no fair trial in the court of public opinion. All that will matter is their perception of your message and intellect, however unfair that may be. Much like I don't particularly enjoy wearing a business suit and tie to work, I do it because if I don't, some clients will not find a young man like myself to be as credible if I'm wearing jeans and a t-shirt. Perception is incredibly important. Don't let them use it against you.
Speak your mind, but if you know you've got a problem with grammar and the ability to make a logical, calm point, at least have someone proofread it before you send it. Consider the backlash of the things you say. A polite letter will always get a better result than an angry, unintelligible, rude, letter.
Call me an elitist, a bigot, whatever you want, these are facts of life whether you like it or not.
PS - This public service announcement is not directed at anyone specifically, just a general attempt at helpfulness.
Very well put. Amen.
It is still Elitism and to allow our elected representatives to practice it is WRONG.
|
thewise1
Member
| Joined: | Fri Oct 19th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 205 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 11th, 2008 10:41 pm |
|
It is still Elitism and to allow our elected representatives to practice it is WRONG.
So write them a letter and complain. 
|
Bear 45/70
Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 11th, 2008 10:47 pm |
|
thewise1 wrote:
It is still Elitism and to allow our elected representatives to practice it is WRONG.
So write them a letter and complain.
In your fantasy politicians care what their constituents think. In my reality they don't.
|
Bobarino
Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 11th, 2008 11:10 pm |
|
It is far from elitist to spell and use grammar correctly and point out when someone else is not. being willfully ignorant of it and not only unwilling to do anything to correct it but proud of it too just increases the perception that someone is a lazy idiot. if someone were writing me a letter, as people are to the mayor here, i would immediately file it in the circular file if it was loaded with spelling and grammar errors.
words have meanings. we use the meaning of words and sentence structures to further our cause with those who oppose us all the time. its hypocritical of us to expect them to use perfect wording and language when they write the laws while some of us refuse to do the same.
its like saying 1 + 1 = 9. those numbers have meaning indiviually and when grouped together. writing a sentence where, grammatically speaking, you espouse that 1 + 1 = 9, makes no sense and you'll be written off as a looney. the proper useages of there, their and they're, hear and here and then and than are not that hard to grasp. i'm sure the people complaining about "elitism" have learned and remembered several different ballistics charts, breakdown and cleaning proceedures etc etc and are perfectly capable of remembering the correct spelling and useage of a few words. choosing not to do so and continuing to look like an uneduated fool is just plain lazy. don't get all upset when someone calls you out on it. its no different that making statements like " a .45 will blow a man out of his shoes from 100 yards." say it, and to anyone with half a working knowledge of firearms, you'll be written off as an idiot.
the people we're dealing with have an excellent understanding of the English language and its useage. why do you think laws are written the way they are? if we are going to beat them, we have to beat them at their own game. that means clear, concise, and correct communications with them and the people we are trying to convince.
so put away your "elitism" card, it doesn't work. its called projection. psychology 101 stuff and its an poor excuse and empty arguement. people operating at a normal level are not "elite" when compared to people operating at a sub par level. and no, "normal" is NOT the standard that YOU think people should be held to. there is an established standard. if we are to accomplish our goals, we need to be operating at or above that standard.
Bobby
Last edited on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 11:14 pm by Bobarino
|
|
|
|
|
