Empire of the East

Fri Feb 21 18:11:15 PST 2003

Mark A Mandel wrote:
> [Damien S.]
> #> >. . .  Nothing for Mark to get excited or worried over, I'd say.
> I was only worried about bad links.
> #> >Especially given the guy can't spell "Brust", "you", or "Please".
> [David S.]
> #> Or "Dragaera", "genesis", "believe" or "vanishes".
> [Steve S. -- is this a last-initial conspiracy?]
> #It could well be that he's referring to some other story/author
> #(possibly not published in English, judging from the guy's own
> #English) and has confused them with Brust/Dragaera.
> I'm pretty sure the guy's a US native English-speaker, no more
> literate than many these days and equally unaware of differences
> between writing and messaging. The abbreviations that are common in
> electronic short text message format are showing up in papers
> submitted for classes, which is causing considerable uproar.
> -- Mark A. Mandel

I'd agree. My generation (which I consider the first that grew up on
computers and the net officially) the 20 ~ some-things have serious issues
with the English rules. This is in my opinion a combination of not
understanding the value of it or not caring. To many it is a matter of
bending normal text symbols to convey points in generally non-standard ways.
This is to either shorten or quicken things or to latch some form of
individuality to words, etc. While I don't think it's an excuse, it is if
nothing else a reason.

Another interesting thing is something called 'leet speak' (as in elite).
Often 'leet speak' combines letters and numbers to create what look like
words. I think it's origination came from actually 'Elite' computer users
whom would camouflage their text in a for tat was readable by anyone whom
knew how it worked but confused law enforcement drones that would search for
particular key words.

If you've got an interest check out this link:


Anyway things like the usage of letter like U to represent 'You' are among
that type of communication, etc.