NationStates Jolt Archive

I propose that these words be banned from posts on this forum:

1. Straw man--It's lazy to call someone else's argument a straw man. It would better if people actually explained why it misrepresented the opposing view, instead of refuting it by being patronizing.
2. QFT--No one ever told me what this meant. Until someone does, I propose it be banned. [Gone]
3. Religion--This is a fairly vague word to start, as it is everything from Atheism to Zorastrianism, depending on who you ask. On this forum, it seems to mean either "the one thing stopping us from going postal" to "the scourge of mankind."
4. Profanity that would not appear in an in-flight movie--It's an example of style taking the place of substance...and the style's not too hot, anyway.
5. ebul--At one time, this was funny. That time has gone. Let's boot it.
6. Words with the letter "b"--Let's just give it a try, and see how things go.

I don't actually think these will or even should be banned, but they are used more than I like. Does anyone have similar sentiments, words or phrases you think are overused here?

I propose that these words be banned from posts on this forum:

1. Straw man--It's lazy to call someone else's argument a straw man. It would better if people actually explained why it misrepresented the opposing view, instead of refuting it by being patronizing.
2. QFT--No one ever told me what this meant. Until someone does, I propose it be banned.
3. Religion--This is a fairly vague word to start, as it is everything from Atheism to Zorastrianism, depending on who you ask. On this forum, it seems to mean either "the one thing stopping us from going postal" to "the scourge of mankind."
4. Profanity that would not appear in an in-flight movie--It's an example of style taking the place of substance...and the style's not too hot, anyway.
5. ebul--At one time, this was funny. That time has gone. Let's boot it.

I don't actually think these will or even should be banned, but they are used more than I like. Does anyone have similar sentiments, words or phrases you think are overused here?

I would also like to suggest banning "teh" as well as "ebul" (sometimes spelled "ebil"), and for the same reason, and the non-capitalization of "God" (i.e. "god").

EDIT: Also "noob" and "n00b".

QFT.


Quoted for Truth
:D

NOT!

2. QFT--No one ever told me what this meant. Until someone does, I propose it be banned.
Quoted for Truth.

Means you agree with something and repeat it for that reason.

I would also like to suggest banning "teh" as well as "ebul" (sometimes spelled "ebil"), and for the same reason, and the non-capitalization of "God" (i.e. "god").

I agree, although the last one is not always true. If someone is talking about belief in many gods, or a god-like leap, they are not capitalized. But if someone is referring to the God of Thunder or the God who is called God, it should be capitalized.

...and the non-capitalization of "God" (i.e. "god").
That's a bit silly. Both are valid: "God" could be English name of the Christian god, and "god" can also be a noun and should not be capitalised in that case.

Quoted for Truth.

Means you agree with something and repeat it for that reason.

Oh, okay. It can now come off the list.

I would also like to suggest banning "teh" as well as "ebul" (sometimes spelled "ebil"), and for the same reason, and the non-capitalization of "God" (i.e. "god").

god god god teh ebil god!

I propose that these words be banned from posts on this forum:

1. Straw man--It's lazy to call someone else's argument a straw man. It would better if people actually explained why it misrepresented the opposing view, instead of refuting it by being patronizing.
2. QFT--No one ever told me what this meant. Until someone does, I propose it be banned. [Gone]
3. Religion--This is a fairly vague word to start, as it is everything from Atheism to Zorastrianism, depending on who you ask. On this forum, it seems to mean either "the one thing stopping us from going postal" to "the scourge of mankind."
4. Profanity that would not appear in an in-flight movie--It's an example of style taking the place of substance...and the style's not too hot, anyway.
5. ebul--At one time, this was funny. That time has gone. Let's boot it.

I don't actually think these will or even should be banned, but they are used more than I like. Does anyone have similar sentiments, words or phrases you think are overused here?

Nice Strawman, now go away noob.

If we stop "strawman" do we go back to "circular reasoning"? Very few who use either have studied logic and know what they mean.

I propose that these words be banned from posts on this forum:

1. Straw man--It's lazy to call someone else's argument a straw man. It would better if people actually explained why it misrepresented the opposing view, instead of refuting it by being patronizing.
2. QFT--No one ever told me what this meant. Until someone does, I propose it be banned. [Gone]
3. Religion--This is a fairly vague word to start, as it is everything from Atheism to Zorastrianism, depending on who you ask. On this forum, it seems to mean either "the one thing stopping us from going postal" to "the scourge of mankind."
4. Profanity that would not appear in an in-flight movie--It's an example of style taking the place of substance...and the style's not too hot, anyway.
5. ebul--At one time, this was funny. That time has gone. Let's boot it.

I don't actually think these will or even should be banned, but they are used more than I like. Does anyone have similar sentiments, words or phrases you think are overused here?

I personally think profanity should be allowed. I only use such words to draw attention to my point, or use it in a sarcastic way. Some people may use certain words a little too much, but I really don't think it's wise to ban profanity.

Ass, bitch, cocksucker, ****, damn, fart, fuck, god damn, motherfucker, piss, shit, tits, turd, twat. We shouldn't all have to babble in baby talk just so you can feel better.

Jefferson said, "Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have...the course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases." If you don't like profanity then don't watch it, don't listen to it, and don't read it. You have the power to change the channel, to turn the page, to click the mouse. What nobody needs your Suo-SHEE parochialism.

If we stop "strawman" do we go back to "circular reasoning"? Very few who use either have studied logic and know what they mean.

While we are at it ad hominem should be given the boot because almost no-one knows what that means either.

Quoted for Truth.

Means you agree with something and repeat it for that reason.

Odd, I thought it meant, "quit fucking talking".

Isn't a calm measured tone better at bringing a point across more effectively than being confrontational and letting angers fly? I always thought that simple logic, although limited in scope, when applied correctly is irrefutable.

Long windy sentences help of course... =P If the other person is just going to shoot down your argument, you may as well make him/her work for it. =P

Let's not do the "fixed" quote thing anymore.

I would also like to suggest banning "teh" as well as "ebul" (sometimes spelled "ebil"), and for the same reason, and the non-capitalization of "God" (i.e. "god").

EDIT: Also "noob" and "n00b".

I can go with you on teh, ebul, ebil, noob and n00b, but not with god. Spelling god with a capital indicates that god is a proper noun, which the word god is not always. If it were proper in English to spell words like mother and doctor with a capital at all times, your point might have some merit, but this is not how the language works.

Besides, I don't think that if there is a god, she minds all that much how we spell it anyway.

Let's not do the "fixed" quote thing anymore.

I can absolutely get on board with that one. It isn't clever, is rarely if ever even amusing, and is most always insulting.

Let's do the "fixed" quote thing more often, it is fun.
Fixed.

1. Straw man--It's lazy to call someone else's argument a straw man.

Not when they are obviously engaging in misrepresentation, no.

If the difference could reasonably be overlooked, yeah, you should explain, and if you're in a patient mood you might be inclined to explain anyway, but if it couldn't and you're not, just calling it a straw man and leaving it at that is perfectly justified.

I would also like to suggest banning "teh" as well as "ebul" (sometimes spelled "ebil"), and for the same reason, and the non-capitalization of "God" (i.e. "god").

EDIT: Also "noob" and "n00b".

Sorry. The whole proper noun vs. noun thing.

I propose that these words be banned from posts on this forum:

1. Straw man--It's lazy to call someone else's argument a straw man. It would better if people actually explained why it misrepresented the opposing view, instead of refuting it by being patronizing.
2. QFT--No one ever told me what this meant. Until someone does, I propose it be banned. [Gone]
3. Religion--This is a fairly vague word to start, as it is everything from Atheism to Zorastrianism, depending on who you ask. On this forum, it seems to mean either "the one thing stopping us from going postal" to "the scourge of mankind."
4. Profanity that would not appear in an in-flight movie--It's an example of style taking the place of substance...and the style's not too hot, anyway.
5. ebul--At one time, this was funny. That time has gone. Let's boot it.

I don't actually think these will or even should be banned, but they are used more than I like. Does anyone have similar sentiments, words or phrases you think are overused here?

While I appreciate your attempt to point out phrases and idioms that have worn out their welcome, I'll advise you to purchase extra lances, 'cause that particular windmill is made of strong stuff.

I find it mildly ironic that the one thing almost certain to not change anyone's language is a direct appeal to, or assault on, the language itself. Besides, this is all your opinion in the first place. As you suggest people "change the channel", you could as well. I don't mean to say that you should leave (far from it, thinking people should be encouraged to stay), but rather realize that a certain amount of wading has to be expected in any public forum.

Anecdotal evidence provided as proof of a particular stance on any issue.

I don't mind personal experience being used to illuminate a situation but the 'I've never seen it therefore it must not be' argument is, if nothing else, plain weak.

Having said that, not much bothers me on these boards.

Not when they are obviously engaging in misrepresentation, no.

If the difference could reasonably be overlooked, yeah, you should explain, and if you're in a patient mood you might be inclined to explain anyway, but if it couldn't and you're not, just calling it a straw man and leaving it at that is perfectly justified.

The OP has a point, though. A strawman is not a Godwin's Law incident, and it's not a false dichotomy, though it's often conflated with both of those other rhetorical pitfalls.

Anecdotal evidence provided as proof of a particular stance on any issue.

I don't mind personal experience being used to illuminate a situation but the 'I've never seen it therefore it must not be' argument is, if nothing else, plain weak.

Having said that, not much bothers me on these boards.

You mean the "Ahmedenijad Refutation"?

You mean the "Ahmedenijad Refutation"?

:)

I like that and I am going to adopt it - hopefully, in time, people will complain about the overuse of this phrase.

I find it mildly ironic that the one thing almost certain to not change anyone's language is a direct appeal to, or assault on, the language itself. Besides, this is all your opinion in the first place. As you suggest people "change the channel", you could as well. I don't mean to say that you should leave (far from it, thinking people should be encouraged to stay), but rather realize that a certain amount of wading has to be expected in any public forum.
As I said at the bottom, I don't really think all of these phrases should be banned; the whole thing is a bit of a joke. Really I just listed words and phrases that I found annoying and invited others to share their own. Like so many threads on this forum, I was just complaining, not really concerned about acting on anything.

Let's not do the "fixed" quote thing anymore.

QFT. (Now that I've learned what that means, I am going to use it to the point where no one else wants to.)

While we are at it ad hominem should be given the boot because almost no-one knows what that means either.

All logical fallacies should really be explained in the refutation. It's fine to say, "Your argument is ad hominem because...," but to just call an argument ad hominem doesn't work. Besides, it's easy to make up your own logical fallacy and then just keep quoting it. "Nice ad nullium argument*."


*I've decided ad nullium means, "Doesn't agree with New Limacon."

Ass, bitch, cocksucker, ****, damn, fart, fuck, god damn, motherfucker, piss, shit, tits, turd, twat. We shouldn't all have to babble in baby talk just so you can feel better.
We shouldn't have to babble? What do you call that first sentence, the Gettysburg Address?

Jefferson said, "Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have...the course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases." If you don't like profanity then don't watch it, don't listen to it, and don't read it. You have the power to change the channel, to turn the page, to click the mouse. What nobody needs your Suo-SHEE parochialism.

That's super. Like I said earlier, I don't honestly care if profanity, "straw man", or any of the other phrases continue to be used, they just annoy me. I invited other posters to share similar phrases.

I would also like to suggest banning "teh" as well as "ebul" (sometimes spelled "ebil"), and for the same reason, and the non-capitalization of "God" (i.e. "god").

EDIT: Also "noob" and "n00b".

Screw it, I'm not going to capitalize 'god' because it doesn't exist.

In fact, the ban on certain phrase won't work because I refuse to go along with this. It's just a waste.

d0n'7 Li|<3 i7, |3i73 |\/|y $hin3y |\/|374L 4$$!

Quoted for Truth.

Means you agree with something and repeat it for that reason.

I always assumed it stood for Quite Fucking True - you learn something new everyday.

I propose that these words be banned from posts on this forum:

1. Straw man--It's lazy to call someone else's argument a straw man. It would better if people actually explained why it misrepresented the opposing view, instead of refuting it by being patronizing.

Only thing that annoys me is the number of people who think "straw man" means "argument I don't like."


3. Religion--This is a fairly vague word to start, as it is everything from Atheism to Zorastrianism, depending on who you ask. On this forum, it seems to mean either "the one thing stopping us from going postal" to "the scourge of mankind."

Fine with me. Most of the time, the only reason I use "religion" is because people get pissy when I call it "superstition."


4. Profanity that would not appear in an in-flight movie--It's an example of style taking the place of substance...and the style's not too hot, anyway.

Profanity doesn't make or break style or substance.


5. ebul--At one time, this was funny. That time has gone. Let's boot it.

Haven't seen this, myself. Don't particularly care.

I personally think profanity should be allowed. I only use such words to draw attention to my point, or use it in a sarcastic way. Some people may use certain words a little too much, but I really don't think it's wise to ban profanity.

I agree, because profanity is a very useful tool to those aho HAVEN'T started using it in a given thread. Whenever I see someone either lose their temper enough to start cussing, or start right off the bat, I know they're using language to obtain a reaction through shock because on some level they lack confidence in the power of their own argument.

Either that or they're just so deep into the habit they can't drop it even to be civil in a thread. Either way, it says much about them.

I agree, because profanity is a very useful tool to those aho HAVEN'T started using it in a given thread. Whenever I see someone either lose their temper enough to start cussing, or start right off the bat, I know they're using language to obtain a reaction through shock because on some level they lack confidence in the power of their own argument.

I'd be careful about leaping to such radical assumptions simply because people curse. Plenty of people (myself included) simply curse because we feel like it. Sometimes I'm in the mood to use "fuck" like a comma, and often that mood will not be angry or upset in any way. Sometimes I just cheerfully drop f-bombs around because the fancy takes me. (Or sometimes I've just got done watching Chris Rock special and it's a bit contageous.)

The key element is, are they cursing AT somebody, personally? If I call somebody a fucking asshole, that's quite different than if I say, "Man, doesn't it fucking suck when a car splashes a puddle up on to you?"


Either that or they're just so deep into the habit they can't drop it even to be civil in a thread. Either way, it says much about them.
One should also be very careful about assuming that there is a link between civility and cursing. Cursing doesn't automatically make a person less civil, and it's possible to be extremely offensive, rude, and uncivil while omitting any curse words.

Of course it's fine to simply not like cursing. My only reason for saying all this is that I see a lot of people get angry on these forums because they misinterpretted somebody else's words or tone. I'd prefer that people get angry at each other over actual conflicts, instead of being angry at misperceptions!

I propose... <snip>

I propose Godwin's Law stops being used as an arguement stopper. It is rather annoying when whole cogent arguements are dismissed because they use the N word.

This isn't particular to this forum.

I agree, although the last one is not always true. If someone is talking about belief in many gods, or a god-like leap, they are not capitalized. But if someone is referring to the God of Thunder or the God who is called God, it should be capitalized.

Actually it would be god of thunder not God of Thunder. The god of thunder usually has a name, this name is not usually God of Thunder.

Let's not do the "fixed" quote thing anymore.

Hey! I actually use that properly sometimes.

I always assumed it stood for Quite Fucking True - you learn something new everyday.

Same thing really.

I propose Godwin's Law stops being used as an arguement stopper. It is rather annoying when whole cogent arguements are dismissed because they use the N word.

This isn't particular to this forum.

But it's not an arguement stopper. At least, I never thought it was.

But it's not an arguement stopper. At least, I never thought it was.

Exactly.

But it is frequently used as such :)

The key element is, are they cursing AT somebody, personally? If I call somebody a fucking asshole, that's quite different than if I say, "Man, doesn't it fucking suck when a car splashes a puddle up on to you?"

I was told by an old woman once never to use curse words as adjectives.

I don't know still what the hell this was supposed to accomplish.

I was told by an old woman once never to use curse words as adjectives.

I don't know still what the hell this was supposed to accomplish.
I guess people like her will consider you more "civil" if you obey her rules.

Though I couldn't tell you why you should give a fuck about making people like that happy. If somebody can't respect what I have to say unless they get to pick and choose my adjectives, then talking to them is going to be far more trouble than it is worth. :D

Fixed.

win

I was told by an old woman once never to use curse words as adjectives.

I don't know still what the hell this was supposed to accomplish.

maybe she just aesthetically preferred them as fucking adverbs?

I was told by an old woman once never to use curse words as adjectives.

I don't know still what the hell this was supposed to accomplish.

Linguistically speaking, in both examples Bottle puts up "Fuck" is acting as an adjective. Both times as qualifies actually.

Of course most modern curse words started out purely as nouns, and have over the past 50-100 years shofted with the rest of English into where we have now, where nouns are much easier to shift into Adjectives, as are verbs, and vice versa. The difference is that curse words have shifted to the front of the movement towards this ability to change word classes more easily in recent times due to less restricted use. So now curse words are leading the way to language change in English, allowing word classes to shift as needed, which is much better anyway.

You can easily see the pattern in the term "fuck" which acts differently in these three phrases.
"Go fuck yourself" - verb
"I hate that fucker" - noun
"You're so fucking stupid" - adjective

And other curse words are following it. Like now how we have terms like "bastardization" and "shitty" derrived from pure nouns.

The linguistics of curse words is pretty fun.

I propose Godwin's Law stops being used as an arguement stopper.
What about the Godwin Variation?

Can we ban "fanboy" also?

Can we ban "fanboy" also?

Bite me, fanboy. Although, 'boi' can go.

I would also like to suggest banning "teh" as well as "ebul" (sometimes spelled "ebil"), and for the same reason, and the non-capitalization of "God" (i.e. "god").

EDIT: Also "noob" and "n00b".

I see no reason to object to 'god'. There are evidences that cite all kinds of 'god' chracters, so it's not an exclusive term... and - even in the case where it is MOST used (this whole 'christian' thing) it isn't even the dude's name.

Can we ban "fanboy" also?

If we banned fanboys from the internet, there would be almost nobody left. Won't somebody please think of the porn.coms? :p

Bite me, fanboy. Although, 'boi' can go.

Grave mah boiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii

If we stop "strawman" do we go back to "circular reasoning"? Very few who use either have studied logic and know what they mean.

I also propose that we ban the phrase "begging the question" when it is used to refer to anything but the logical fallacy of that name.

Actually it would be god of thunder not God of Thunder. The god of thunder usually has a name, this name is not usually God of Thunder.

A lot of it is based on what the writer wants. For example, I would write "Thomas Jefferson, President of the United States," even though president is not technically his name. Likewise, I would write "Thor, God of Thunder." At the same time, I would probably say "Thor, the Norse thunder god."
Capitalization is left more to style than other rules of grammar; especially with words such as "god."

Plenty of people (myself included) simply curse because we feel like it. Sometimes I'm in the mood to use "fuck" like a comma, and often that mood will not be angry or upset in any way. Sometimes I just cheerfully drop f-bombs around because the fancy takes me. (Or sometimes I've just got done watching Chris Rock special and it's a bit contageous.)

The key element is, are they cursing AT somebody, personally? If I call somebody a fucking asshole, that's quite different than if I say, "Man, doesn't it fucking suck when a car splashes a puddle up on to you?"


One should also be very careful about assuming that there is a link between civility and cursing. Cursing doesn't automatically make a person less civil, and it's possible to be extremely offensive, rude, and uncivil while omitting any curse words.

That's true. I guess what annoys me about swearing is when it is a personal attack (like you mentioned) or when people use it to emphasize their point. For example, instead of saying "My boss is an idiot because..." saying "My boss is a [profane adjective] idiot."
That being said, I think it is odd to use profanity often. The entire point of taboo words is that they're, well, taboo. Their shock value diminishes if they are constantly used.