Setekh wrote:
urge to kill... normal?!
i accepted the fact that idiots would rule the world when a girl handed in GCSE coursework in lesser 1337 (y'know, the c00l, pwn3d, f33r rubbish)
and had it marked, at a high pass (B i think)
well, as i wandered off while typing this i seem to have forgotten the rest of my point.
That. Actually. Happened?
Forgive me if I sound disbelieving of you. It's not you yourself I'm inclined to disbelieve. It's the sanity of the markers. They should have failed her. Completely. Disastrously. They should not have been able to comprehend it in the first place, which evidently they must have. Have you any idea what subject that was for? (Here I am, hoping that it's one I don't do, because if it is, I will feel dirty and my grades will be much less worth the hard work.)
There's a difference between chatspeak and abbreviations. The latter is for very short phrases or words. These save time typing, especially when in a rush. The former is a whole manner of communication that expects the audience to be able to understand and respond in the same way. (Personally, I think it would only be polite to ask a person you don't converse with often if they would mind if you used chatspeak, especially of the indecipherable variety, before you commence. Not everyone's accustomed to chatspeak.)
Something is very, very wrong when chatspeak appears in a publication to help you go to college. Seriously, chatspeak implies informality and a subject of a non-serious nature. Is college now meant to be taken as though it's one great big fat joke and it's not actually important or serious enough to be treated with some formality and, thus, respect?
I have a new life mission: to indoctrinate small children on the matter of learning a language properly.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/78a02/78a029eedd52cf19a1bab108d4fa0abcf7ccd892" alt="Smile :)"