Email: Password: Remember Me | Create Account (Free)

Back to Subject List

Old thread has been locked -- no new posts accepted in this thread
???
12/25/03 06:26
Read: times


 
#61376 - Just a point of view
Responding to: ???'s previous message
Jonathan wrote:

Some on this site seem very concerned about the "time wasted" in having to decipher whether 'u' means "you" or "micro"

and:

Some form of consistency must be implemented, or a list of "accepted abreviations" should be produced to make it fair to punish those for commiting this...

also:

Most have good questions to ask. Sometimes these people, however, don't know the etiquette associated with 8052.com.


Hallo Jonathan,

let me show you my point of view:

Someone who comes to this site and wants to make a posting is friendly begged FIRST to try another way to get the wanted information, BEFORE making a posting! On the header there are 5 points written in red letters, which the poster should follow, BEFORE making a posting. Yes, even the input window of search machine is copied to the header to make absolutely clear, that FIRST a search should be initiated, BEFORE making a posting.
The reason for this is to implement a filter. This is not directed against the less educated people, but just the opposite. It's implemented to keep the forum interesting, to keep the trivial questions, which can be solved by simply looking into a datasheet or tutorial, out of this forum.
If this filter would not exist, the forum would not be attractive for anyone, any longer. Why? Because then a shear monstreous amount of text had to be handled by all the visitors. This would be directed against the real interesting threads.

To obey these five points, written in red letters is the major etiquette of this forum. And if someone is NOT obeying this etiquette he will be 'remembered' friendly or less friendly. This etiquette is highly visible and evident to anyone, who wants to make a posting. And it's just unfriendly to violate this etiquette!

'Abbreviations' subject:
Imagine the following situation. You are at a company and have to write an important letter to an important customer. And you know, that your boss will see this letter. Would you use abbreviations like 'u'? ...... 'Hallo Mister 4ester, are u fine?'
Why not? Think about, why you would not use abbreviations in an important letter to an important customer and you will know the answer, why some people here are 'not amused' about abbreviations.

Many people, who use this kind of popart-abbreviations like 'u' for 'you' or '4' for 'four' (or 'for'!) or '2night' for 'tonight' and other shit, want to demonstrate a certain character: " Hey guys, look at me, I'm someone, who takes it easy. I'm cool, I have fun, I don't make unnecessary work, I do others make it. Hahaha..."

Language used in a letter is something like the 'visiting card' of your company. And if the letter is ful of abbreviations, then the effect is that you are not thought to be serious. I have seen many times, that important letters had to be written twice, only because of one wrong comma!

Or imagine you are studying and writing your final work, diplom work or whatever. Would you use abbreviations like 'u'? Why not? Think about, why you would not use abbreviations in your final work and you will know the answer, why some people here are 'not amused' about abbreviations.

Abbreviations and bad language is avoided in cases, where you want to be respectful to someone. And if you don't give your best (or even refuse) to formulate accurately or if you use cumbersome abbreviations, then it's just the remove of respect. That's how I see the situation.

The etiquette needed here is very very simple: Do, what you would do in a serious letter to an important customer (or to your boss!), and everything will be fine. You don't need a certain list of unwanted abbreviations...


Bye,
Kai

List of 6 messages in thread
TopicAuthorDate
Just A Couple of Thoughts ...            01/01/70 00:00      
   RE: Just A Couple of Thoughts ...            01/01/70 00:00      
   Just a point of view            01/01/70 00:00      
      Agreed!            01/01/70 00:00      
         abbreviations            01/01/70 00:00      
            RE: abbreviations            01/01/70 00:00      

Back to Subject List