 |
| Register | Login | |||||
 |
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
|
| Register | Login | |||||
|
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
| Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - - Posts by Silvershield |
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 |
| User | Post | ||
Silvershield   580                    Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6315 days Last view: 6303 days |
| ||
| I'm not asking every single person in the world to have a graduate-level grasp of every intricate detail of English grammar - hell, I'm an English major at college and there are plenty of things I don't know - but you talk about it like it's not at all important. The fact of the matter is, if a person on an informal message board like this submits a piece of writing and asks for it to be reviewed and critiqued, and I see that it is horridly constructed (as far as its grammar and mechanics), I'll skip it. Poor grammar doesn't just make a piece harder on the eyes, it reduces clarity. I don't want to have to reread every sentence three times to get its meaning just because a person doesn't understand how to properly use a comma.
Again, I restate, I'm not looking for every average schlub who wanders into a silly little rom-hacking forum to be able to write like a trained professional, but I think it's simply a matter of courtesy to the people who are reading your work to put some effort into making your writing as coherent as possible. You can bet that, if you set foot in a college writing workshop with a story that looks like it's been written by a third-grader, you'll be laughed out of the room (or simply asked to revise it, if the instructor is nice). I reiterate again, I would hardly look for professional-level grammar in a place like this, but if a writer is asking me to give him my time in the form of a thorough critique of his work, the least I could ask of him is to take the time to consult with a proofreader, check a style manual, or do something else that will allow me to really have a grasp of what he's trying to say. Edit: Also, don't confuse "formal writing" with "grammatically correct writing." Just because I'm not writing for a professional business setting or for publication doesn't mean it's suddenly unnecessary to use proper grammar. A person who strives to stick to what's correct isn't just doing it for his own personal amusement or to display his wonderful talents, but to assist his reader. It's a matter of courtesy, frankly, not a matter of holier-than-thou, "I'm better with English than you are" snootiness. (edited by Silvershield on 01-20-07 01:18 PM) |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6315 days Last view: 6303 days |
| ||
| No "explosion" intended. The language probably sounds quite a bit harsher than it was meant to if you took it as an attack, because that was hardly my aim.
But, the fact remains that grammar truly is a matter of courtesy. If a person is writing something for his own amusement, I couldn't care less how much or how little punctuation he uses, whether he dangles his participles, whether he uses active or passive sentences, or whatever else. But if that person is going to submit his work to a public forum and ask me to read it and critique it, I think that person at least owes me the basic revision and proofreading of his own work. |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6315 days Last view: 6303 days |
| ||
Originally posted by AlkisIn short, no. The old "immigrants take all our jobs" deal is probably exaggerated and blamed too often for other problems, but it has even the smallest seed of truth. Not to mention, immigrants screw with the wages an employer offers to legal workers, because an illegal immigrant will accept a lower salary almost invariably. I don't know enough about the debate to offer a really strong treatment of either side - nor do I really stand on either side of it, in honesty - but it is an utter falsehood to say that illegal immigration has no ill effects whatsoever. |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6315 days Last view: 6303 days |
| ||
| That's a shame. A bit of a dumb move, maybe, to go to that party and do what he did there, but it still doesn't sit quite right with me. For one thing, what he did would be legal virtually anywhere else in the country (because the age of consent is generally 18, no?). And, of course, I'm consistently bothered by how easily a woman can pull the rape card and will not be questioned about it. That's not to say that a woman who says she's been raped is usually lying, but instead that the man often stands no chance at all even if he didn't rape her. | |||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6315 days Last view: 6303 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Black Lord +Wow, you're three for three  .
First, getting drunk is no excuse for cheating. Period. Second, "one strike and you're out" is a pretty good philosophy to go by, at least in my experience - both firsthand and among others, I've seen that a person who cheats generally continues to be untrustworthy, despite how often they promise otherwise. Third, dreams are random images. They have no deeper meaning, and any such meaning that you find is either pure coincidence or observer bias. |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6315 days Last view: 6303 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Snow TomatoAs has been mentioned before, the presence of a university is a huge boon to virtually any town. The economy of the surrounding area is supplemented substantially, both by the influx of college-age kids who have daddy's money to throw around, and by the creation of jobs. Even at my school, which is in Poughkeepsie and only has around 4500 undergrads, there are a great deal of locals working in food service, as janitorial and cleaning staff, and certainly in miscellaneous office jobs and whatnot. The image of "drunk college kids running around causing trouble" is usually tolerated when the locals see all the cash they pump into the economy. Originally posted by Snow TomatoI think that's an untrue stereotype. Not that it's offensive or anything - not to most people, at least - but it is fairly far from the truth. |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6315 days Last view: 6303 days |
| ||
Originally posted by JombIt is an anachronistic and anomalous law in a single specific state, not the age of consent laws in the nation as a whole, that is screwing Genarlow Wilson. Not to mention, age of consent laws are absolutely useful and, in most cases, absolutely valuable. But, in this case, the article outlines how the prosecutors and jury took the letter of a law that was designed to punish pedophiles, even while the law's spirit would see Wilson as a free man. Originally posted by JombAgain, the article points out that virtually everybody is fully aware that Wilson is no legitimate sex offender. Even the people that put him in jail in the first place. People aren't ignoring the problem because they think they'll be called "friendly to sex offenders," but because they either completely ignore the specifics of the case and insist that Wilson is actually, honestly guilty of a terrible crime, or out of sheer stubbornness or refusal to admit their mistakes in convicting him in the first place. Originally posted by JombWhere are you drawing this "prediction" from? If anything, the laws seem to be loosening, as evidenced by the changes to Georgia's legislation in light of this particular case. Originally posted by JombThe age of consent law, as I remarked earlier, is useful and essentially necessary as it stands now. For one thing, it's no more arbitrary than any other age would be; I mean, after all, you can pick any threshold, from 12 years to 14 years to 17.5 years, and it would be just as arbitrary. The problem isn't that the age is too high or that it's arbitrary, but instead that prosecutors refuse to differentiate between a legitimate case of child molestation and a mutually agreed-upon encounter. Originally posted by JombSo, a child older than 12 years should be free to have sex with whomever she pleases? What if it's a 45-year-old man who is sleeping with her? A 13-year-old is not a child, you say, so when that man convinces her to have sex with him (and she ultimately does so of her own volition), he has not committed a crime? Even if, when she's grown and matured, she realizes what a dire mistake it was? (More likely, she won't even realize how much of a mistake it is, but will instead just be psychologically damaged for the rest of her life.) Originally posted by JombAnd, after reading this article, I find that this DA seems to be about as unscrupulous as they come. After reading what he's said, I am totally disgusted. Originally posted by JombDon't pull the "Europe is an enlightened Mecca and America is a bunch of Puritanical barbarians" thing. I hate that. You make a sweeping generalization when, in truth, the only people responsible for this injustice are a group of uninformed jurors and a jackass district attorney. |
|||
|
Silvershield 580  Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6315 days Last view: 6303 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Ziff"Noisy and messy," maybe. But I'll be you most people will accept that population in exchange for the money they bring, the businesses and industries they support, the cultural center they tend to create, etc. Not to mention, many local governments are working to improve the generally sub-par conditions and aesthetics of these regions. |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6315 days Last view: 6303 days |
| ||
Originally posted by SamuraiXAn exception is only "necessary" because, in cases like this one, a prosecutor could easily refuse to acknowledge that the accused has violated the letter of the law without actually violating the spirit of it. And, of course, laws are meant for their spirits to be upheld, while their letters are the unfortunate but unavoidable byproduct of the way language works. Originally posted by SamuraiXI didn't call it arbitrary - I was responding to Jomb, who did. |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6315 days Last view: 6303 days |
| ||
| Not bad. The character shift seems a little abrupt to me, but it's a short story and you generally don't have too much space to work with when putting that kind of thing together, so I can't fault you too much for it.
One remark I'd like to make: in general, my personal preference leads me somewhat away from profanity in fiction and creative nonfiction. That's not the Puritan in me speaking, deeply offended at every usage of the f-word - hell, I use it several times a day, myself. I just tend to object to it in writing. It seems to me to be "cheating" in a sense, using a contrived mechanism to create an effect in a reader rather than doing so simply through effective writing. That's not to criticize you or say you are an ineffective writer, just that it sometimes pays to weigh the advantages and disadvantages of resorting to profanity in a given situation. Let me reiterate, it's not some Puritanical urge of mine that is leading me to point this out, but instead the firm belief that many writers - and, I reiterate this as well: I am not making a direct criticism of you - will take the f-word or any other curse and just throw it in there to create the same effect that a horror movie director is aiming for when the murderer pops out of the shadows and the soundtrack suddenly gets very loud. That is, it's a cheap way of scaring (in the case of a horror film) or emotionally affecting (in the case of written text) the audience, whereas taking the time to create a truly frightening atmosphere (for the former) or instilling the effect of that profanity without actually using the dirty word itself (for the latter) shows more skill. |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6315 days Last view: 6303 days |
| ||
| Might I suggest some spoiler tags for the Harry Potter points? I've never read the books myself, and truly do not intend to, but just out of courtesy for others who may be different from myself .
One thing that annoys me is something that I see in virtually every piece of fan-generated content I've ever seen, and even transcends media so that it is just as common in video games and other such outlets. That is, the hero or villain who is the ultimate badass. You know the type. He wears all black, often a cape, has long hair, is physically large and imposing, speaks softly and rarely, is called "a loner," is emotionally troubled in some way...but is, of course, immensely powerful. I'm tired of the archetype. You can only see so many Sephiroth-inspired heroes and villains before you simply decide to never read fan fiction again. Can nobody create a character with more than one dimension? Am I totally off-base here, or is anyone else familiar with that character type? Is anyone else tired of it? |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6315 days Last view: 6303 days |
| ||
Originally posted by HiryuuBut, of course, creative writing isn't about imitating life perfectly. If you want to accurately depict a realistic speech pattern, you won't just be using profanity but you'll also be using a lot of devices that will really not add to the text at all. Take this example once provided by a teacher of mine: In fiction, a typical phone conversation tends to get straight to the point. Especially in short fiction, you don't have the space to waste on people going through all the formalities that a "realistic" portrayal would call for. So, no matter how realistic the following exchange may be, you'll never see it in good fiction: (phone rings) Person 1: Hello? Person 2: What's up? Person 1: Nothin' much. Person 2: Me neither. Person 1: So, whatcha up to? Person 2: Oh, nothin'...you? Person 1: Same. And so on. You see, as a fiction writer, you can't expect to make every single aspect of you characters and your story realistic. It's not practical, for one thing, and it damages your story. I've used the analogy of a developer creating a video game: sometimes the developer needs to sacrifice an aspect of gameplay that is more realistic because it is simply no fun. In most games, characters don't have to eat and drink and go to sleep, because it's simply not enjoyable. It's realistic, but it does not contribute to the greater work. Likewise, a writer will often sacrifice realism for the greater good of the story. Originally posted by HiryuuWell, in the first place, I'm not too sure how much value a story with that sort of humor has in the first place. Good humor is not funny for its shock value, but for something more clever and premeditated. But that's beside the point. It's one thing when some foul language is absolutely required, as in that punchline above. It's another when the author's purpose could be ideally served by normal words, or by having a bit more style and learning how to create a desired effect in a reader without resorting to that shock value. (Again, that analogy I love so much: a great horror film is not comprised of scene after scene of the bad guy popping out of the shadows, accompanied by an enormous boom on the soundtrack, and surprising everyone; the best horror movies have just a generally creepy atmosphere and rely rarely, if ever, on such cheap effects.) Originally posted by HiryuuAs I've been saying, profanity is often a stand-in for skillful writing. That is, why carefully and meticulously craft a character, painting his picture through dialogue and actions and narration, when I can just have him curse left and right? In both cases the reader will realize "this character is a crude person," but I think the effect is created both more colorfully and more valuably when it is done through legitimate writing. Originally posted by HiryuuIt's not about being open-minded. Like I said above, I have the mouth of a sailor in my day to day "real" life. It's not about being offended by the language - very little offends me, in honesty. But face-to-face dialogue and the written word are two very, very different media, and what's tolerable for one is less so for the other. |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6315 days Last view: 6303 days |
| ||
Jomb, I couldn't agree more with most of what you say. There's no sense in punishing someone who is involved in a relationship with another consenting person who is close to him in age. If the two are of reasonably similar maturity, then I can't even imagine how you could label one or the other person as a "victim."
Originally posted by JombThe thing is, you're attached to the notion that any person, upon entering puberty, is of appropriate psychological age that he or she can decide what is right for him- or herself. It is simply not so. A 45-year-old man sleeping with a 13-year-old girl, as per my example, is far more than "distasteful," as you've called it. It is an ethical crime, and should be enforced as a legal one as well. If there is a way to separate that sort of situation from a case in which a boy and girl of similar age are involved with one another, I'd be all for it. But I'm not willing to allow such a situation to become legal if it means I would also have to agree that the 45/13 situation is all well and good, too. I can see the merit in the former, but absolutely refuse to accept the latter. You talk about human sexuality as if it's just a natural biological function. That is certainly one of its primary descriptions, but is ultimately oversimple. For whatever reason - whether due to artificial causes or whatever else - sex carries with it any number of psychological, emotional, and societal effects. A 13-year-old child may be able to do many things with near-adult skill, but simply cannot make the fully informed decision to have sex. You're a special case, maybe, because you say that you're unaffected by an experience like that. (Of course, you're also male, so the experience is inherently dissimilar to the more common scenario of an older male and younger female.) But you can bet that it's not the best memory for many people. And I'm a little bit shocked that you would consider that sort of mistake to be just the sort of thing that a kid needs to screw up on their own so that they may learn the lesson firsthand. It's useful, maybe, for a child to get drunk so that he can see how sick he gets afterwards, or drive fast so that he can get pulled over by the cops, but I think this is one lesson that is best unlearned. Originally posted by JombAnd the case of a grown adult taking advantage of a child, even without using any sort of explicit force, is not nearly as exceptional or rare as you seem to think. If it takes one law to cover both scenarios, I'll chalk that up as a necessary evil; it's better than having no law to cover either. |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6315 days Last view: 6303 days |
| ||
Originally posted by JombWhose definition are we using here? If you ask me, a full-grown man who is attracted to thirteen-year-old girls is deviant. Originally posted by JombHow about coercion? How about the misplaced allure of an older man in the eyes of a younger girl? How about the idea that sleeping with an older man can come across as an act of rebellion? You paint it as if every situation in which a thirteen-year-old girl would sleep with a 45-year-old man would be the result of pure, true love between the two parties. I think that's naive at best, and absolutely dangerous at worst - more often, I would suggest, it is because of one of those three reasons I just suggested, or because of a similarly negative reason. Originally posted by JombOr, not necessarily a "sleezeball," but at least a person with psychological problems. Originally posted by JombThen I would hope that such a consideration would ideally be covered within the law, and that due process would reveal the circumstances of a particular series of events so that an innocent man is not punished. Originally posted by JombYou just cut off half of the sentence, taking the quote phrase completely out of context. It's "just a biological function" when considered from a purely clinical point of view, but taking that perspective is unabashedly wrong. The societal associations with sexuality are absolutely necessary to consider. Originally posted by JombDid you read my post at all? The very first thing I said is that there's no reason to punish two young people who happen to be on opposite sides of the age of consent. We're in agreement on this point - while I disapprove of sex at such a young age, I'm not going to support any sort of legal prevention of it. Originally posted by JombAnd, again, the law ideally would not target people in that sort of situation. Originally posted by JombI disagree entirely. The impact of Western society prepares males to deal with sex more easily than females are able. I'm not about to get into this discussion now, except of course to remark that the promiscuous female is a "slut" while the promiscuous male is a "player" - a guy who had an early sexual experience will be lauded for it, while a female in the same situation will be shamed. But that's beside the point. The point is, an illicit sexual relationship between a (much) older male and a (much) younger female is more common than the opposite. And that younger female will certainly have trouble coming to terms with the situation in the future. Originally posted by JombIt was for the sake of the example. Substitute "speeding" with "vandalism" if you want - it has the same effect. But, no, "learning who is an appropriate sexual partner" is not the kind of thing a kid needs to learn through experience. Especially when that child needs to sleep with a man three times her age in order for the lesson to be learned. Originally posted by JombI never said anything about a large age gap being the more common of the two scenarios; I only said that the situation in which there is such a large gap is not as uncommon as you make it sound. |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6315 days Last view: 6303 days |
| ||
| Ugh, I hate this kind of thing. I can't tell you how many would-be crushes of mine have been thwarted before they even begin just because the person and I have very little contact, which essentially dashes any hope of a meaningful bond forming.
I know that doesn't help you at all. Just throwing my thoughts in there. Heh heh. |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6315 days Last view: 6303 days |
| ||
Originally posted by SamuraiXHigher difficulty? When a great many people I know couldn't even hit 1100, and virtually none did any better than 1350? From the perspective of the common student, it's hard enough as it is. Originally posted by SamuraiXSo that you have to pay more to take the test because, instead of having the majority of the test as computer-graded, it would be hand-graded? Wouldn't that favor the wealthy (who can afford to take the test more often in order to maximize their grades), which is what you're trying to correct for? Originally posted by SamuraiXWhy? So that the kids who are good at math but not too smart otherwise have their grades artificially inflated, while the kids who are smart but not very good at math have theirs artificially deflated? Originally posted by SamuraiXTrust me, if you're talented enough, you'll go somewhere. There are a bunch of kids that I know who are not as smart as I am, but who are going to schools that are as good as, or nearly as good as, the one I'm at. And you can bet that anyone at a level higher than mine isn't exactly going to be struggling for an acceptance, either. |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6315 days Last view: 6303 days |
| ||
Originally posted by ArwonThe main test is in the range of $30, if I remember. And, sure, it's a joke that you need to pay to take the test when virtually any school you'll apply to requires it. But the College Board is a business, after all. |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6315 days Last view: 6303 days |
| ||
Originally posted by SamuraiXI feel like I may be digging myself a hole here, because the SAT has been changed since I graduated. It actually has a free response section now, whereas there was no such section when I took it (and, of course, the grading scale has been changed to reflect that). But I remember 1350 hardly being average (and wikipedia agrees - 1350 is the 93rd percentile, while ~1000 is around average). In any case, nowadays most everyone is going to go to college, and so it's unrealistic to think that only people who have truly "proven themselves" on a standardized test will get into a school. Even the "dumb" kids are going to go somewhere, even if it's just a community school or a lower-tier private school. Originally posted by SamuraiXNot sure if it still works like this, but I know that when I was in high school, you could take the SAT as many times as you wanted and they would ultimately count the highest math and the highest verbal sections independently. So, your final combined score when applying to a college could be the result of tests taken on two different occasions. You could take the test multiple times, and only improve your scores: doing worse wouldn't hurt you, because the highest numbers would remain, and you have the chance to pull off a higher grade that would be retained. Then, of course, there's the sorry state of writing and English curricula in our country. I'm sorry to say that I know more than one person here at college who struggles to write a complete sentence. Originally posted by SamuraiXAP tests are a whole 'nother beast. People take them selectively, generally only being admitted to an AP course that they have shown prior aptitude in. (Case in point, I was in History and English AP courses in high school, but not Math or Science.) On the other hand, everyone takes the SAT, regardless of their specialty. Originally posted by SamuraiXNot to possibly touch on a sore topic, but I've found that the SAT is a better measure of intellect than purely a student's grades are. From what I've seen, a kid who can get wonderful grades by studying day and night will not necessarily do well on the SAT, while the opposite is true from someone who has generally poor grades. Of course, it's all anecdotal, but I know that I saw the trend confirmed widely when I witnessed who did well and who did poorly on that test in high school. |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6315 days Last view: 6303 days |
| ||
Originally posted by SamuraiXThat's true, I do remember such an option. So it's not like the College Board would be wringing the last penny out of your family just to take the test. Originally posted by SamuraiXBeing in the 93rd percentile means a lot. It means that you did better than nine out of every ten people who took the test. That doesn't "not mean anything." Originally posted by SamuraiXIf you took offense then you misread it. A "dumb" kid is more likely to go to a community school than to a respectable private school, and I think that's a fair remark to make. But that's not to say that the people at a community school are invariably idiots. The two statements are not equivalent. Anyway, my school not only accepted me, but is paying for three-quarters of my tuition, even though my high school grades make it quite clear that I was an underachiever. It's my SAT that got me in, and my SAT that got me into every other school I applied to, also. Schools like to say that they barely even look at SAT scores because that's what parents and student applicants like to hear, but it's not true (whether for better or worse). |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6315 days Last view: 6303 days |
| ||
Originally posted by SamuraiXBy whose standard is the SAT "junior high school level?" As I pointed out before, it maybe be easy for you, but plenty of people struggle with it. You overestimate the capabilities of the average incoming college freshman these days. |
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 |
| Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - - Posts by Silvershield |
