Recently I got flamed by someone who authors the blog “Popnomination,” which talks about an assortment of issues – one of them being the use of marijuana. To cut a long story short, the author seemed more incensed that I would refer to her as a him than about the actual issue – marijuana consumption. If you’re interested, check out my previous posts, beginning with “I Guess English Class Wasn’t as Important as Popularity,” and then “It’s On! ”
I guess what aggravates me so much is that this person, who prefers not to leave her name, is not that she uses pot; that’s her business – as long as it doesn’t impact me or my family, I don’t care. Rather, the “rub” is that Ms. I-don’t-want-to-leave-my-name obviously knows the power of the Communications Factors, and yet she doesn’t take the time to read what she writes before she hits the publish button!
I want to make this clear: This blog is not here to debate the good/bad qualities of marijuana. Never having used the drug, I cannot claim to be an expert on the subject. However, I am an expert on grammar, punctuation and flow – in essence, Communications.
If Ms. I-don’t-want-to-leave-my-name does not have the ability to recheck her writings, after using the drug, then she is leaving herself open to mockery and ridicule. Or maybe she should wait ’til she comes down before she hits the ever-attractive “Publish” button. If there’s one thing I’ve learned through my years of writing, it’s this: No matter how good it sounds when your writing it, there is always something you could say more effectively – whether it’s punctuation, grammar or spelling – you can make whatever you’ve written better with a second (or third) read.
Why does Ms. I-don’t-want-to-leave-my-name make these errors? Is it because she forgot to read over the post? Is it because she didn’t know the rules? Or is it because she’s so incapacitated that she doesn’t even notice her mistakes? I don’t know, but I do know this: Ms. I-don’t-want-to-leave-my-name is a very intelligent, acute, sharp-witted (young) lady.
In her post “Orgy of the Hemp Eaters,” she writes, “Honestly, I love this stuff. Did I say that already? Fair enough: It’s true it [insert your favorite expletive here] with your memory a little. But it’s only temporary.” I found this to be funny, and in my post “I Guess English Class Wasn’t as Important as Popularity,” I made this same joke, without giving her attribution. Shame on me.
I knew she was intelligent because of what she wrote in her flame: “I believe it was Shakespeare who said, “Arguing over the internet is like running in the Special Olympics. Even if you win, you’re still [disabled].” That’s funny, right? Here I was on Saturday morning, taking her flame seriously, and she starts to quote Shakespeare! Okay, I’m ready, got my cup of coffee and my copy of The Complete Works of Shakespearewithin an arm’s-reach. “Arguing over the internet…” Wait a minute, Shakespeare didn’t know about the internet!
I laughed out loud. Honestly, I did. Like I said, Ms. I-don’t-want-to-leave-my-name, you are funny, sharp and quick-witted, so just take a few extra minutes to re-read over your posts before you publish them for the world to see!
How ’bout it?
This entry was posted on November 7, 2007 at 7:10 am and is filed under grammar, networking, social networking, The Communications Factors, Web2.0. You can subscribe via RSS 2.0 feed to this post's comments.comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.