Originally posted by Hiryuu

---

And it would probably turn most 'normal' people's heads.

I mean, seriously, where I'm living now I would think something of a '12' caliber would really make people go 'what?'. I've had it happen in conversation far too often otherwise or themselves give me odd looks.

That's why, in public, I have to really REALLY dumb my conversations down. Not so much so that I talk like a redneck wannabe but to a degree where people can actually understand the words the are coming out of my mouth thank you Chris Rock.

---

Originally posted by Xkeeper

---

I've managed to get 30-something by typing in "testtesttesttesttesttesttest" over and over... again, this tool is rather dubious.

---

Originally posted by SamuraiX

---

That's odd then. Since I think your posts are some of the easier ones to read. You seem pretty normal to me.

---

Originally posted by jeff

---

YOUR BARGAINING POSTURE IS HIGHLY DUBIOUS.

my posts should be easy to read. i don't think many of them pass over three sentences. i usually type short, simple, and to the point. i don't read long posts so i won't write long posts either.

10.75. and it said this was all 1 sentence. smart.

---

Originally posted by Alice

---

Originally posted by jeff

---

YOUR BARGAINING POSTURE IS HIGHLY DUBIOUS.

my posts should be easy to read. i don't think many of them pass over three sentences. i usually type short, simple, and to the point. i don't read long posts so i won't write long posts either.

10.75. and it said this was all 1 sentence. smart.

---

Probably because you don't capitalize the first letter.

---

Originally posted by Xkeeper

---

I've managed to get 30-something by typing in "testtesttesttesttesttesttest" over and over... again, this tool is rather dubious.

---

Originally posted by Kamek

---

Originally posted by Xkeeper

---

I've managed to get 30-something by typing in "testtesttesttesttesttesttest" over and over... again, this tool is rather dubious.

---

I highly doubt that the tool is entirely legitimate given that copy-pasting the two "words" "abcdefghijklmnop qrstuvwxyz" 100 times yields a 57.77 grade level. I certainly don't need multiple doctoral degrees to know that that's absolute nonsense.

---

Originally posted by Kamek

---

Originally posted by Xkeeper

---

I've managed to get 30-something by typing in "testtesttesttesttesttesttest" over and over... again, this tool is rather dubious.

---

I highly doubt that the tool is entirely legitimate given that copy-pasting the two "words" "abcdefghijklmnop qrstuvwxyz" 100 times yields a 57.77 grade level. I certainly don't need multiple doctoral degrees to know that that's absolute nonsense.

---

Originally posted by PrincessPeach

---

I got a 10.75 with my approval requestposting.

I wonder what the man-pages would get.

Edit: The US-Patent for Dr. Mario gets for the first 10000 Characters a whooping 18.78.

---

Originally posted by Metal Man88

---

Then it is my belief it would be excellent if they could improve the tool. I believe it might be valuable.

Also I think most of the strife in this topic came from the fact some people took it as denouncing complex posts, which a number of people utilize.

However the number of syllables isn't the be-all and end-all of difficulty; using basic words, one can express strange concepts which require several read-throughs to get the gist off. Some instruction manuals have baffled me with sentences that have two meanings--and why do they have to always happen where the wrong action could cause catastrophic results?

---

---

Now that I have made this catalogue of swindles and perversions, let me give another example of the kind of writing that they lead to. This time it must of its nature be an imaginary one. I am going to translate a passage of good English into modern English of the worst sort. Here is a well-known verse from Ecclesiastes:

I returned and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favour to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all.

Here it is in modern English:

Objective considerations of contemporary phenomena compel the conclusion that success or failure in competitive activities exhibits no tendency to be commensurate with innate capacity, but that a considerable element of the unpredictable must invariably be taken into account.

This is a parody, but not a very gross one. Exhibit (3) above, for instance, contains several patches of the same kind of English. It will be seen that I have not made a full translation. The beginning and ending of the sentence follow the original meaning fairly closely, but in the middle the concrete illustrations -- race, battle, bread -- dissolve into the vague phrases "success or failure in competitive activities." This had to be so, because no modern writer of the kind I am discussing -- no one capable of using phrases like "objective considerations of contemporary phenomena" -- would ever tabulate his thoughts in that precise and detailed way. The whole tendency of modern prose is away from concreteness. Now analyze these two sentences a little more closely. The first contains forty-nine words but only sixty syllables, and all its words are those of everyday life. The second contains thirty-eight words of ninety syllables: eighteen of those words are from Latin roots, and one from Greek. The first sentence contains six vivid images, and only one phrase ("time and chance") that could be called vague. The second contains not a single fresh, arresting phrase, and in spite of its ninety syllables it gives only a shortened version of the meaning contained in the first. Yet without a doubt it is the second kind of sentence that is gaining ground in modern English. I do not want to exaggerate. This kind of writing is not yet universal, and outcrops of simplicity will occur here and there in the worst-written page. Still, if you or I were told to write a few lines on the uncertainty of human fortunes, we should probably come much nearer to my imaginary sentence than to the one from Ecclesiastes.

---