Welcome to Gaia! ::

Well if people have dyslexia then they would definitly be excused by me. I might jump to conclusions, but I do ask questions. And I think I have said that if English is someone's second language then I would be trying to help them. Most of the people I meeet on here that have a different primary language do a very good job with their English.

Well Text talk and L33T are for speeding text based conversations up, and there are more variations between groups of people. When it comes to forums, it really doesn't apply, unless the topic creator has indicated that they prefer to converse in such a way.

Forums are slow and ongoing conversations. There is no reason to be concerned that your answer might get missed if you take longer to type it, and typing a message in a forum doesn't cost a cent per letter like texting used to when it first came out (thus the origin of shortening words).

Forum contributors tend to come from many more countries and demographics than what you find in chat rooms or text groups. People who have English as a secondary language may actually have something important to say, and they should have the opportunity to understand what they are commenting on, or to understand what people are responding to their contributions to the conversation. It is not fair to make them learn several variations of English slang when they are still learning to grasp true English. It may not be hard for you to pick up, but that doesn't mean it is easy for everyone to learn.



There are thousands of online guides and books that deal with online etiquette, and when certain forms of communication is most appropriate. I would venture a guess that there is nothing you would consider validated though, as you have formed your opinions.

We could go on the tangent that a chatspeaker is so by choice, and they probably have a good enough grasp on English that they could converse correctly if they were so inclined. This is why it gives the impression that chatspeak is lazy. Not everyone who knows English can understand chatspeak, thus the discrimination and the inconsideration is performed on the part of the chatspeaker.

If someone enters an international forum, and enters a debate where people are trying to use proper English form and etiquette, they should consider that there is a major likelihood that there are people participating in that forum who have English as a secondary language. For them not to take this into consideration would prove that they are the shallow ones.

Chatspeak when not appropriate ranks on the top of the list of noobish behavior. It's up there with begging, trolling, and flaming. It isn't something I made up, it's something that most people agree with.

You're speaking in terms of languages, chatspeak is based off of native language. It doesn't take much effort to understand, plus speaking the same language in a forum is necessary for communication it isn't done necessarily to be "courteous". Chatspeak isn't another language, it is just a derivative of any language. Meaning it can still satisfy the communication necessary as long as the chatspeak being used is derivative to the language being used in the forum.

Also I still don't see the reasoning behind why someone must conform to a certain forums way of typing just because that is the way they like to type. And whatever inconsideracy the chatspeaker may bring I would think that it pales in comparison to the petty selfishness of the group. But calling them inconsiderate or not is just a matter of opinion and I have no grounds to debunk that. Yet I still maintain that this opinion is petty and unwarranted.

If some chatspeaker tries to force you to speak CS then I would consider that inconsiderate, because they are stooping to your level. Yet you would still have the right to refuse their demand to speak the way they want you to, just as they have the equal right to do that. I would expect that you would give them as much courtesy to their choice of typing as they should to you. Also again I think whether it is courteous or not to conform your way of typing to a group that types standardly when joining them is a matter of opinion. I think it would only be uncourteous to those with some irrational prejudice towards them.

English chatspeak is not a different language to english, that's like saying the colloquials of southern english is a different language. You're not learning a different language you're just learning subtle differences in the way two people speak their own language.

For what reasons must a chatspeaker conform to the conventional ways of typing in a forum? The reason why you're inconsiderate is because of your demand that they write like you, and the reason they're not inconsiderate is because they demand you do nothing. What you're doing is creating a false dilemma that isn't there. You're free to ignore them if you do not want to "learn the arduous task of reading chatspeak." But you do not have the right and are indeed inconsiderate by demanding them to write formally just for your appeasement.

What's hard to understand about chatspeak? From the way you describe it you seem to know what words are altered and how from it's original form. I doubt you're telling the truth, otherwise you wouldn't know that the word was shortened from it's formal state or not. Clearly you understand chatspeak.

You're acting as if typing the way you want to must be necessary? Why? If you enjoy doing something in your own particular way and it isn't harming anyone, why should they not do it? For your appeasement right? If the chatspeaker sincerely wants to communicate, and the rest of the forum is being stubborn and inconsiderate and demands that s/he type the way they do or else be ignored. Because to them it makes a marginal difference in communication, then I guess they'll have to type that way, won't they. But I never said you guys aren't allowed to be petty about it, go right ahead.

But if the group isn't selfish, inconsiderate, stubborn, and petty. Then you're taking for granted the assumption that they won't be heard if they type in chatspeak. In this forum for example, they would certainly be heard by me and maybe even get a reply if I was really interested in what they said. So no they don't have to type formally to be heard, they do have to type formally to be heard by the likes of you people.

*facedesk* Just because I understand it doesn't mean other people can as well. English is my first language.

*facedesk* Please prove someone who can fluently speak english has trouble understanding chatspeak. If they don't know how to fluently speak english, then chatspeak is the least of their problems. They would be better off learning to speak english fluently. What reason is their to believe someone has difficulty understanding chatspeak if they have mastered the language it's derived from? To say that it is difficult for them without proving it is to take that assumption for granted, and that really deserves a *facedesk*.

It became much easier to communicate when word spellings were standardized in the first dictionary.

*facedesk* Please verify this with a source.

No one learns English by figuring out chatspeak, because in no way is it standardized.

*facedesk* You don't usually learn a main language by it's derivative, what kind of counterpoint is this? By understanding the main language you can easily understand what the differences in it's derivative are based off of, thus understanding the meaning of the difference is easy to do.

Chatspeak gives the impression that you didn't look over your words, that you felt no need to proofread to make sure your ideas were clearly presented (to avoid miscommunication).

*facedesk* Clearly presenting your ideas relies more on grammatical structure not necessarily the way you spell. Arranging your sentence so that types of ideas are correctly relative to others allows you to avoid miscommunication. Spelling standardly isn't required to do this, therefore it doesn't give me the impression that they didn't proofread what they said to avoid miscommunication.

You said yourself that it was okay for someone to disregard a post because it was in chatspeak. Now you're attacking me for repeating that the person who typed that way would be ignored

*facedesk* I said it was okay because you have the right to do that, and therefore is not objectively wrong. What I did was give my opinion, I think your reasons for ignoring the person are petty. Basically that's fine you can act that way if you want, but I'll still think you guys are assholes.

I don't see how it's obviously true. How does communication become easier just because a dictionary came out?

What people are disgusted at or not varies between individuals. Also the rules of etiquette are arbitrary, thus who is rude is arbitrary. There's no legitimate reason to say someone is doing something bad because they didn't follow your rules.

If you cannot prove they're doing something bad, then what right do you have to demand them stop doing it? It all boils down to your appeasement, your selfishness, that includes others like you in the forum.