Disappointment with the grammar and spelling of some TA users

I've noticed that many of the forum discussions that TA has tweeted lately have contained glaring grammatical and spelling errors.  I find this disappointing and even personally embarrassing as it inevitably reflects not only on the original poster but on the forum as a whole and, by extension, the larger atheist community.  I know written communication isn't everything, and it certainly isn't a high priority among the public generally, but we should try to meet a higher standard.  Given the unlikelihood that individual posters will suddenly take more care when writing, I think the operators of the site's Twitter feed should consider not tweeting discussion titles with serious errors.

That's one poster's opinion, for whatever it's worth.

Views: 3223

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Should we formalize that? $10 is the price to... buy a vowel.

Sometimes, I can't help myself.

Sagacious - maybe you could help the Hebrews with YHWH --

I don't think someone who really understands the ontological argument (which has several variations) can refute it in a tweet.

What you are saying is something attributed to Einstein who supposedly attended a lecture by a fellow physicist and collared him after the talk to ask if he could summarize his theory in a few words. The man replied that his theory was far too complicated and sophisticated to summarize. Einstein reportedly replied that "If you can't explain your theory in simple terms, then you don't really understand it yourself."

However, Einstein didn't place a 140 character limit on his interlocutor.

I'm afraid you are wrong to equate my opinion on brevity to Einstein's supposed opinion on simplicity.  I happen to share that opinion, and I believe the two ideas are related, but they are distinct.  Many writers agree that brevity is a virtue and that it correlates strongly to clarity of thinking and expression.

Okay, but to put a 140 character limit on an expression or you don't know what you are talking about is too arbitrary.

That would be too arbitrary, yes.  The general point to take away from this long digression is that you should be able to express yourself very concisely.  Good units to aim for could be short paragraphs, sentences, or even Tweets.

I dunno, this is rather brief --http://api.ning.com/files/1JVLEe2Ab1z*GTLcTSl2IOF1HU-Iu*cjSVlw1UiOlRLK2ey9N6y9h8AFhYAm-6oxMOqmQ3rI18jNxlSa5grdPfX90xhRIUG7/Animemc2.gif

Thanks, I'll do that right now.

Amen! (Should I spell-check that?)


I submitted a suggestion to TA about editing tweets and quickly received a response from the site's administrators.  They informed me that content from TA is automatically tweeted, so there is no way to intercept tweets and edit them.  They also expressed agreement in principle with the idea and stated that they, too, find such errors embarrassing.

I feel better. :)

Tell me - I'm really not up on the terminology - are those who frequent Twitter known as Twits?


© 2018   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service