Social Experiment. With hot chocolate and waffles by dreamtrove

Frem

Of course you know I don't have a TV, American Idol is actually far more time investment per content.

I think you're being unduly hostile to new ideas. The creation of huge quantities of content to wade through to reach ideas is just a devolution of communication.

IIRC, just now, I made the same point you did re: Darfur in about 10% of the text.

Part of what got me about Taoism was that after reading the texts, there was more core truth in Lao's 5000 words than in the Bible's 800,000.

This is simple evolution: No one reads Pirate News, nor Alex Jones, nor do they watch television. Welcome to the 21st century.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, September 4, 2009 7:54 PM

BYTEMITE

I understand the issue of time constraints, but is this really a good thing?

I counter with hieroglyphics.

(A)+♁

☾ †

☊! ♐!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, September 4, 2009 7:58 PM

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Y'know, if anyone really doesn't want to invest the time to read a longish post, it's really, really, stupefyingly simple: DON'T READ IT. Wait 'til you have more time to come back and read it, or just skip it. But please don't ask us to trim down our posts to suit your short attention span. And DT, you of all posters shouldn't even bring it up. You're as guilty of the long post as anyone here, and more than most.

If I wanted to twitter about things, I wouldn't be here. Twitter is for twits. Ask Sarah Palin, unemployed right-wing blogger. Believe it or not, there ARE things that need more than a word or a sentence to explore.

Oh, and Darfur, the Bible, the Tao, all of that crap? I can sum it up in 5 words, and save you a ton of reading and possibly some great suffering:

"Don't eat where you shit."

That's the basis of all modern philosophy and learning, it would seem. The golden rule, the ten commandments, the seven pillars, the pearl of great price... it all comes down to not eating where you shit, also known as "do unto others as you would have done unto you" (which was written down long, LONG before the Bible, but Isocrates doesn't get shit for credit on that one. Neither do the Egyptians, who codified it as early as 2000 BC).

Mike

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, September 4, 2009 7:59 PM

BYTEMITE

More seriously, if we start limiting words per post, aren't we just going to end up with more posts and the same amount of reading?

But I do empathize, as someone who spends hours on this board. There has to be some reasonable sort of compromise.

What if: everyone writes as long a post as they want, but at the end, we put our 160-ish word conclusion for people who just want to skim ahead and read the sound bites?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 5, 2009 5:14 AM

Mike,
That's 248 words. I said WE, so me too.

Quote:

Don't have the time? DON'T READ IT. Come back later or skip it. Don't ask us to clip for your attention span. And DT, you're guilty more than most.

Twitter is for twits. Ask Sarah Palin, unemployed right-wing blogger. SOME things need more words to explore.

Darfur, Bible, Tao? "Don't eat where you shit." aka "do unto others..." All philosophy, golden rule, ten commandments, seven pillars, pearl of great price... LONG before the Bible. Isocrates doesn't get credit. Nor Egyptians in 2000 BC.

KWICKOtweet

Quote:

No time? DON'T READ IT. Twitter is for twits. Some things NEED more. Philosophy, Religion=Do unto others. Credit Isocrates or Egypt, 2000 BC

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 5, 2009 6:00 AM

BM,

Possibly. But editing helps. If source A=1x info/page, B=10x, people will read B. Mike makes my point: He doesn't read, he skims: because no one has time for this.

Non-editors are lazy, they make the reader do the work. Want to convey an idea? Actually try. MSM dominates because they edit. Remember "Paperback Writer?"

Both of those lines fit into an SMS, but it took a couple tries. If we try, we learn, it might become intuitive. There are people here with something to say. Those who actually communicate are the ones who try.

Anyway, "compromise" is a good idea. May I suggest a 160 word summary, not conclusion. We want to know how you got there.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 5, 2009 6:00 AM

Argh. Double post (no avoiding this inefficiency.)

Edit:

BM,

Since I have this post, I'll address your earlier point: All three of my last posts could have been compacted to one<160 word post, with a <160 mike edit. No intentional multiple posts would prevent this devolution.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 5, 2009 6:15 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

In general, your ideas will reach more people if you can present them succinctly.

--Anthony

(Sixteen words that encapsulate your whole point, you verbose monster.)

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 5, 2009 6:34 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

In essence:

Or, less succinctly: Not possible. For me. I'm too worried about being clear, given the difficulties of written communication, and over-explain as a result; I write as I think; I actually DO go back and edit my posts, and remove stuff (believe it or not!), but obviously not enough; I have a habit of repeating myself, sometimes to say things in different ways, sometimes just unconsciously.

Last but not least, as another said, I've always said that I don't apologize for my long posts, nobody has to read them. If I get into a debate, I want to make each point and try to make it clearly. If someone misunderstands what I said, yes, I will repeat it, and try to be clearer. Also, I get here "late" compared to other time zones, so I end up responding to a bunch of people in one post.

I fully agree your idea has a lot of merit, it's just not something I'd be capable of without a lot of work, and to be honest, it doesn't appeal to me. I like to read each person's post, especially if long because they've detailed their thoughts, then respond to it in a like manner.

Given I spend a lot more time on the internet than others would be comfortable with, I also fully agree with your stance. But I enjoy reading and writing in depth, so sorry, it's not for me. Also I think discussions tell me a lot about people, and that's something I enjoy and am willing to spend time on. The internet is my major form of socialization--Jim, Choey and I pretty much keep to our own little "world", so I value internet exchanges and friendships.

I'll try for more brevity in "regular" threads, but debate isn't something that can be done in "bites", it takes detail, and debates are what I enjoy most. It may be an improvement if I post a separate post in reply to each person rather than one long post to all, so I'll try that, too.

But I will try in other things, as your concept certainly has merit. I disagree with what some others have said about it, and I think putting you down for being a long-poster yourself, when you are suggesting YOU will try to edit as well, is fallacious.

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 5, 2009 7:43 AM

Anthony,

Thanks. Well put. One quibble. You're post doesn't explain "why" which is what I'm trying to get across, so people will get it.

But you are a master of terse, if you care to share anything else...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 5, 2009 7:55 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

The singular good thing about Star Trek VII is a line that encapsulates your point in poetry.

"Time is the Fire in which we Burn."

(8 words, kudos to the bad guy.)

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 5, 2009 8:40 AM

Quote:

Non-editors are lazy, they make the reader do the work. Want to convey an idea? Actually try. MSM dominates because they edit. Remember "Paperback Writer?"

But that's the PROBLEM, not the SOLUTION. Haven't you yourself argued that the MSM don't actually INFORM, but rather try to pound everything into the 30-word soundbite?

We need to have MORE conversation, MORE clarity, MORE communication, not less. "Less" and "editing" are how we got from "healthcare reform" to "death panels".

I won't be self-editing. I use the words I use to make my point. Often enough, I already think I'm cutting corners, or assuming that people are bright enough to draw the lines. I won't be asking them to color in between those lines, too. If anyone finds me too hard to read or follow, I cordially invite them to not read me.

Mike

ETA: Oh crap - I forgot my summation, which I think will set a thread record for brevity, both of words and letters:

No.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 5, 2009 8:44 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

The optimal post length is that which conveys maximum clarity, regardless of word count.

--Anthony

(Sixteen words, woot! ;-)

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 5, 2009 8:46 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello,

The optimal post length is that which conveys maximum clarity, regardless of word count.

--Anthony

(Sixteen words, woot! ;-)

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

You mean,

"The optimal post conveys clarity."

Five words, Wordy McTalksalot.

Mike

(Guess I should drop my sig, and save a word.)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 5, 2009 8:49 AM

BYTEMITE

Or maybe just

"Woot!"

In context, that kind of says it all.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 5, 2009 8:52 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

LOL!

This word-economy-land is a fun place to visit, but I'm not sure I'd want to live there.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 5, 2009 9:43 AM

FREMDFIRMA

I concur, Niki.

The more detail, the clearer the understanding, text alone already loses something over voice or interpersonal, and thus, misunderstanding occurs.

I can do snark in a sound bite: I cannot COMMUNICATE in one.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 5, 2009 10:08 AM

Nik, (159 words)

Trying efficiency: (No criticism, an editing exercise.)

Quote:
I worry about clarity in writing, so I over-explain. I write as I think. I DO edit (believe it or not!), but I repeat myself, in different ways and unconsciously.

Just applying Strunk and White.

Quote:
No apologies. Nobody has to read my long posts. In a debate, I try to make each point clearly. If I'm fail, I try to be clearer. I respond to a many in one post, due to time-zone.

Many people multi-respond.

Quote:
The idea has merit, just would take a lot of work, and doesn't appeal to me. I like to read each post, especially long one because they're detailed, and I respond in kind.

I omitted "and to be honest," because "to lie," is nonsensical.

Neither long nor short posts contain more information by default. Some posts are more infodense.

Any text can be made shorter without information loss. Second edit, minimal loss: omit what we already know, or is implied.

Quote:
I spend more time online, but I enjoy reading and writing in depth, so sorry, it's not for me. Discussions tell me a lot about people, I enjoy spending time on them. Jim, Choey and I keep to our own little "world", so I value internet exchanges and friendships as my main socialization.

Thought your skills could help. @5% of any post is personal, @80% is noise.

Quote:
I'll try to be brief in "regular" threads, but I don't enjoy debates in "bites." Maybe if I reply to each person separately, it will help.

Much of the meaning is saved in the above hack&slash.

Trying to communicate effectively, I thought others might be interested. I'm interested in what people post, but often don't have the time. (Neither will most people.)

Re: book-posts, Ideas could be brief and comprehensive. Geezer's rebuttal was adequate and short. You may not agree with it, but he does it effectively.

Quote:
I will try in other things, as your concept certainly has merit. I disagree with other who putting you down for being a long-poster yourself, when you suggest YOU will try to edit as well.

I replaced "you are suggesting" with "you suggest," straight out of S&W.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 5, 2009 10:18 AM

Mike,

Your posts are already short. "I use the words I use" says nothing. MSM over-edits, sure, but they dominate over those who do no edits.

Frem,

Verbose posts convey little. Responses tell all: Not much of each post was read. Mike has proven he reads very little of mine.

Both of those are tweets.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 5, 2009 10:47 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello Dream,

Honestly, if discussion here were limited to short, jagged, high-octane blurbs, I'd probably bail.

I like language, when it's used well. Some of the loveliest language I ever heard was also grossly inefficient in terms of conveying information.

If someone wants to take me by the hand and lead me through all their thoughts, I might enjoy the trip. It's still my choice as to whether I wish to follow.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 5, 2009 11:13 AM

Anthony, (158 words)

I would wholeheartedly agree, but this is not to what I refer. Such writing is usually constructed from a core skeleton. If this is not done with fiction, then it's unreadable.

The language of the post is like IM: spoken, blathering rant, loaded with filler, unfiltered by human brain. (Recently, I edited an IM. 37 pages, 9 hours. Less than a page of content.)

Rules of writing are like Dale Carnegie, we learn but forget, and end up arguing with a service rep, knowing that it's the wrong approach.

Mostly, I do this because people here don't just jabber, they present ideas. If you wish to present an idea, best to do so in a manner that is read.

The exercise intended here was an experiment to see if people *could* communicate effectively, in hopes that this might in turn help them in doing so.

When I edit quotes, please correct any misrepresentation. Thanks :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 5, 2009 11:17 AM

Quote:

Verbose posts convey little. Responses tell all: Not much of each post was read. Mike has proven he reads very little of mine.

Actually, that's a misattribution. I *DO* read your posts, usually every word of them. I've missed a few threads and posts recently, what with having a death in the family and all, and have been playing catch-up. If there's something you wrote that I didn't get, it may not be because I didn't reat it, but that it just didn't jump out at me and grab my attention.

As you've pointed out, an awful lot of the body of some posts are nothing more than cereal filler. Am I being chastised for reading some of them as such?

Here again, we find ourselves in a place where we're failing to communicate not because of too many words, but because of too few.

I value the thoughts of everyone here, even - maybe even ESPECIALLY - those here with whom I have vigorous disagreements. Everything they write tells me something about them that I wouldn't otherwise have known. So far as I know, there is NOBODY here that I know in "real life". Of course, for all I know, I *HAVE* met some members before, and just didn't realize it. Be that as it may, our words here are likely to be the only method we ever have of getting to know each other on anything approaching a personal basis. I'd hate to think that I could be in the middle of a deep philosophical discussion, only to have it cut short by someone barging in with, "Too many... words."

Nope, the world's problems won't be solved by less words, but by more talking. It would be the height of hubris to think that we can solve any of them here, but we can spread the word and try out ideas on a small scale before unleashing them in our own lives.

The best that I can hope for or ask is that the idea of conveying meaning with words will lead us all to become better writers and more effective communicators and worthier correspondents. Would that really be a bad thing? If I were to, say, forego an installment of American Idle (I use that spelling intentionally) to come in here and instead have a life-affirming conversation with Niki, or a heartfelt and heated argument with Wulf, would my time have been better served watching Idle? I sincerely hope not. I'd love to see this place become the Town Hall, where we are here to actually TALK to each other, and joke around and poke fun, and point out where we see errors and hypocrisy, rather than just a clearinghouse for snarky soundbites (not that there isn't a place for those as well).

When I said "I use the words I use", I wasn't being facetious or trying to be a smart-ass. I mean that I use the words I use for a distinct purpose, and I choose those words carefully to convey my exact meaning. When that meaning is unclear, it's a failing of mine in not finding the correct words. That that means nothing to you isn't something I can really change; it just means I'll have to find different words to try to have an effect on you. But that's not likely to lead to FEWER words, mind you...

Mike

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 5, 2009 11:26 AM

PIZMOBEACH

... fully loaded, safety off...

It's tricky - I bail on some of the longer posts because it can *sometimes* seem like it's more about the poster than the subject.

just sayin'

I feel like some folk could go on forever and what they're trying to say would still not be clear to me.

I am in no way suggesting that the longer posters should make any changes - just honest feedback.

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com Now available on your iPhone

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 5, 2009 12:12 PM

PEACEKEEPER

Keeping order in every verse

I tend to agree about the long posting.I often give up after about three paragraphs.A lot of the time it seems that people think that the longer their post is the more intelligent they are.A word of advice.You can talk forever and still say absolutely nothing.The art of Precis is a very handy art to master.People tend to remember quintessential one-liners;not rambling theses.

Peacekeeper---keeping order in every verse!!!

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 5, 2009 12:13 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Mmmm. Interesting discussion. Lessee:

If I were to use your method, I would spend an awful lot of time editing. So which is better; that someone take time reading, or I spend time editing? I'm selfish; guess.

Essentially, it would mean "not being me". I stick in stuff like "hee, hee, hee" and, as above: Hmmm and lessee...they're part of my personna...I talk as I speak.

Dunno Strunk & White...?

Quote:
Thought your skills could help.? @5% of any post is personal, @80% is noise.

S'a little confusing, and I guess I'd say "I disagree" if I understand it right. The 80% you call noise, I call "personality", or at least part of it, and I enjoy that, both reading and writing.

Quote:
I like language, when it's used well.

One of the great things I appreciate about English is we have so many words for everything that we never have to use the same adjective twice if we don't want, and I enjoy reading it. Language for its own sake can say something, too.

Your concern is brevity; mine could equally be correct English. Neither of us can get what we want, I accept that. "but this is not to what I refer" jars me; "It is not to this which I refer" or "I'm not referring to this" read more smoothly, but I understand, so it's no biggie.

I didn't understand your post very well, maybe not for lack of brevity, I dunno, but:

Quote:
Such writing is usually constructed from a core skeleton

What writing?

Quote:
The language of the post is like IM: spoken, blathering rant, loaded with filler, unfiltered by human brain.

I didn't get that...the language of posts in general, or a specific post?

I agree with mike:

Quote:
our words here are likely to be the only method we ever have of getting to know each other on anything approaching a personal basis.

and I love

Quote:
The best that I can hope for or ask is that the idea of conveying meaning with words will lead us all to become better writers and more effective communicators and worthier correspondents.

I also agree wholeheartedly that the time I spend here is worth it. We all have different lives, so what we choose to do with our time is up to us. I don't have that much in my life that makes time constraint, and I value time here above TV and numerous other activities.

Perhaps I especially like the concept he put forth:

Quote:
I'd love to see this place become the Town Hall, where we are here to actually TALK to each other, and joke around and poke fun, and point out where we see errors and hypocrisy, rather than just a clearinghouse for snarky soundbites

because I CAME from a place where threads devolve into literally hundreds of posts of just that--snarky sound bites, devoid of meaning or reason, and nothing ever gets truly DEBATED or discussed.

One of the thing I blather ('cuz I do blather about things I'm interested in, obviously) to Jim and Choey is finding a place where people DO write long, where they delve into their feelings about things, question, debate, postulate, argue, agree, etc.

I realize this isn't what your talking about, but I think several people's tendency to write with all of the above included allows others find things about which THEY want to question, discuss, etc. I guess in part it appeals because it's like the all-night discussions we "heads" used to have, and I don't find that much anymore. People small talk mostly, or agree with one another; they don't LEARN from one another, take things apart, question them, IRL. 'Course, it's been a long time since I've been social, but Jim and I and Choey and I do it, and I didn't find it much in other friends "out there".

I guess you could say: "talking is friendship", and I wouldn't want to talk to someone by mentally being succinct--couldn't keep the thougts if I kept going in to edit them.

Quote:
I mean that I use the words I use for a distinct purpose, and I choose those words carefully to convey my exact meaning. When that meaning is unclear, it's a failing of mine in not finding the correct words.

Goes for me, too.

Okay, I'm caught up. I skip some posts because of subject matter and references to stuff I don't want to bother looking up...but other than those few, I, too, read every word in almost any thread I'm interested in.

Again: I DO hear what you're saying. I feel differently, is all.

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 5, 2009 12:37 PM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello,

The optimal post length is that which conveys maximum clarity, regardless of word count.

--Anthony

A Consideration of NewOldBrowncoat's Rule:
" Any time the posts get longer than 1 screen, it's time to quit that thread."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 5, 2009 2:07 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by NewOldBrownCoat:
Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello,

The optimal post length is that which conveys maximum clarity, regardless of word count.

--Anthony

A Consideration of NewOldBrowncoat's Rule:
" Any time the posts get longer than 1 screen, it's time to quit that thread."

I'm sorry. Did you say something?

[/snark]

Mike

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 5, 2009 5:24 PM

Mike,

I knew you were on edge about something; was intentionally avoiding saying anything. Sorry to hear.

You sometimes miss key things in posts, happens. My point: the fault was mine: You skim because I babble. Most RWEDers skim babble. If meaning gets lost in words, there are probably too many.

This is *about* better writing, not cutting people off or sterilizing the language. No need to take this personally. The point is message without filler. Just trying to improve my writing, with anyone else who wants to try, hence the thread title.

A little slice of babble:

In the first two weeks after Obama got his labradoodle, 17.5 million words had been written about BO.

Yes, there is always fat to trim.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 5, 2009 5:30 PM

Pizmo, PK, NOBK

Thanks. Pretty much my point. I often ramble. To gain you as an audience, I would have to be more concise. I'm probably not alone in that.

It's not just a skill to be learned, but practiced, and it means actually editing. Some people do it. I'm not singling anyone out here. This isn't a dictate, it's for improving clarity for those who want to reach an audience.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 5, 2009 5:59 PM

FREMDFIRMA

Don't make me get all Vaarsuvius on you!
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0010.html
I can SO do that, if I wanna, hee hee.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 5, 2009 6:20 PM

Niki (156 words)

Trying to improve my clarity, thought others might be interested.

Quote:
I would spend an awful lot of time editing. So which is better; someone take time reading, or I spend time editing?

Editing takes time. As we learn, we edit faster, babble less (I'm hoping.) About 1/2 abandon verbose posts, others don't care. Ergo: editing increases audience.

Quote:
it would mean "not being me".

Acquiring skills? Always useful. Everything changes you.

Quote:
Dunno Strunk & White...?

Google.

Quote:
The 80% you call noise, I call "personality",

80% is noise. First edit, I tried to keep everything quintessentially "Mike."

Quote:
One of the great things I appreciate about English is we have so many words for everything that we never have to use the same adjective twice if we don't want, and I enjoy reading it. Language for its own sake can say something, too.

Increasing vocabulary decreases length. Mundane repetitive stuff is long. My concern is signal to noise ratio. Sometimes my posts waste people's time. I want to reach my audience. The signal can be information or personality. The noise is just noise.

Quote:
What writing?

Well constructed, flavorful writing is cut down and then rebuilt. People talking is usually noise.

Quote:
the language of posts in general

Yes.

Quote:
I don't have that much in my life that makes time constraint, and I value time here above TV and numerous other activities.

I have no TV and limited free time. I also write, so it's important to me.

If you respond to me, I'm the audience, efficiency doesn't matter. If you post political commentary, it must seek an audience.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 5, 2009 6:28 PM