Comments on: Blogomannerisms

By: Caitlin

Caitlin — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 13:19:19 +0000

I would have to make a distinction between style and being repetitive. I think it’s fine to use similar phrases or words frequently but when it becomes a limitation in self-expression, then it starts to become a problem.

By: Shance

Shance — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 08:48:46 +0000

I see it. A LOT TOO. Makes you unique though. Never seen so much of that in a single post. No bull.

By: Os

Os — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 03:41:28 +0000

I have “…” all over my posts. Screw commas and periods.

By: Shance

Shance — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:32:16 +0000

Lela: I apparently try to blend in both, though the mix is quite very “unstable” since using words and stuff + making it short kinda contradicts a lot more than they blend. And yes, BIG WORDS EASILY GET TO THE POINT.

Zero: Having a plethora of words doesn’t really help if you can just use the same words in a different sense. Not that creative, but making people get your point is easily done. No need to sweat yourself in thinking if you know you prefer making them short and usual as possible. It all depends on your style.

omo: It happens in a 50-50 sense. You write to make people get your point of view and yet you stray them after elaborating oh so much. Sucks, no?

By: omo

omo — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:10:40 +0000

For me… Like, tl;dr substantively I guess? I mean, maybe, it’s really, really, very hmm. How the hell? Crap.

My goal is not just to deliver the point. Half the time it doesn’t happen and it doesn’t matter too much.

By: Zeroblade

Zeroblade — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 15:38:43 +0000

Thing is, I’m incredibly wordy when it comes to having to writing short, succinct stuff. Yet, I tend to write awfully short entries, despite inspiration. And you’re damn right when it comes to writing out of your usual style - it took me about twice as long to write something in a more formal tone, rather than leaving the colloquialisms in.

By: Zeroblade

Zeroblade — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 15:34:03 +0000

Thing is, I can be unbelievably wordy and far too detailed whenever I need to write something important. What’s weird is that I usually don’t write entries over a thousand words. Lack of intelligent content, I’m guessing.

By: Lelangir

Lelangir — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 15:29:27 +0000

Brevity and lucidity rarely synchronize themselves when the subject matter is hard to wrap your head around. Definitions on “short” are also up for grabs. “Short” for me is like 1000 words, and anything below that I just consider a “post” instead of an “article” of sorts. But here in the sphere, 2500+ words is pushing it.

With writing, there’s the “just tell me already” side, and the “I Want To Sound Poetic” side. Everybody likes both, but too much of the latter isn’t really a good thing.

With vocabularianism, “big” words usually have more meaning than short ones. Why say “a realization or actuality as opposed to a potentiality,” when you can say “entelechy”. Accessibility vs. pragmatism - although that depends on your clientele.