Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Starver]

I'm really sorry, but that whole statement is Nietzsche-tier difficult-to-read. There's not a single period in that entire first paragraph (after "No." at least); not even at the end, as it technically ends with an ellipsis. I'm pretty sure torturing a sentence like that is some sort of war crime, or at least, it should be.

Your fault. I was made to feel that I should go and edit in asides to qualify every little bit of what I first said, in restating that the (actual) former predicated the (actual) latter.

Or I could have just relied upon the usually one-way understanding of causality. But that seemed too simplistic an answer.

And ellipsis..? Those weren't even proper ellipses…

[Culise]

I'm really sorry, but that whole statement is Nietzsche-tier difficult-to-read. There's not a single period in that entire first paragraph (after "No." at least); not even at the end, as it technically ends with an ellipsis. I'm pretty sure torturing a sentence like that is some sort of war crime, or at least, it should be.

Your fault. I was made to feel that I should go and edit in asides to qualify every little bit of what I first said, in restating that the (actual) former predicated the (actual) latter.

Or I could have just relied upon the usually one-way understanding of causality. But that seemed too simplistic an answer.

And ellipsis..? Those weren't even proper ellipses…

I see.  If that was your belief, I hereby grant you formal permission to use periods in order to break run-on sentences into separate components.  Pertinent asides may be granted their own sentences, rather than forced to reside within a parenthetical gloss or daisy-chained subordinate clauses.  My sentences are truly no joy to read, as my own previous post can attest, but I believe even I can clean that sentence up a wee bit.  However, I must admit that the fact that you managed such an impressively long sentence did amuse me by reminding me of a fun quote I saw once: "That sentence should be taken out into the street and shot as a traitor to the English language." Hee. ^_^

Do let me know if I misunderstood your meaning; while impressive, it was quite difficult to parse your lovely work.

(Relevant?)
No.  The quote-unquote 'success' of Afghanistan in mobilizing a force to take on a tin-pot feudal system helped encourage the latter (re)invasion of Iraq under what appeared to be a similar benevolent aegis to those willing to pursue it.  However, even the invasion of Afghanistan at that time had yet to reach a successful conclusion, nor does it seem likely to do so as of the present day with the benefit of what we have learned since 2003.  The invasion of Iraq encountered a situation different from Afghanistan, brought about a situation different from Afghanistan, and succeeded only in toppling Saddam Hussein himself. 

Certainly quite complicated, however, and relative values of legitimacy and success may be plausibly debated.

[Starver]

I might myself have ended the sentence at the point that the "Nor" would have started the next and "…Afghanistan. It brought…" in the final segment. (Plus rewording either with synonyms or just differently to not have two "sitution different from"…  No.  Wait, that's your editing that did that, just noticed. Good. I do pride myself on not repeatedly repetitiously repeating words that repeat. Unless it is for deliberate rhetoric effect, naturally.)

Ok, clean up the bit about the "brought" (that may or may not need to halt/restart, in the process), and I'm happy. With the option to restart the flow upon the Nor.

(And I'm using proper ellipses now. Potentially saving 2 bytes of data, each time!)

[Il Palazzo]

Since we're kinda harping/providing feedback on your writing style now, Starver, let me take this opportunity to say that I've always found your unfocused style extremely hard to read. The smothering of asides and qualifiers, often taking up more space than the intended message, doesn't help at all.
These days I tend to skip what you write - not because of the content, but because of the apparent disregard for readability.
Unless your goal is not to communicate, but to create some form of art for art's sake. Then more power to you.

[Starver]

To settle the argument: a) I know I ramble, b) it is not intentionally obtuse, abstruse or otherwise obfuscating, b₂) except when it is, but then I try to make that quite obvious by context and/or smileys, and c) it is often an accurate reflection of everything I'm trying to convey and suffers more from post-editing to elide 'superfluous' elements that actually aren't.

(Three editing passes to that (one to adjust taggings). It never shortened.  But it now says what I mean/means what I say to my satisfaction. Until I notice the next omission of fact!)

[sluissa]

Not strictly politics, but connected tangentially.

https://twitter.com/catawu/status/883880818216648704

Supppsedly a woman ignored evavuation announcements because she thought they were "fake news".

Just a random tweet, may or may not be true.

[smjjames]

Not strictly politics, but connected tangentially.

https://twitter.com/catawu/status/883880818216648704

Supppsedly a woman ignored evavuation announcements because she thought they were "fake news".

Just a random tweet, may or may not be true.

Probably one of those kind of people who would ignore an evacuation warning anyway.

[redwallzyl]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/884016887692234753

Wow, that's a really stupid thing to do. I think every intelligence agency in the US just had a heart attack.

[Zanzetkuken The Great]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/884016887692234753

Wow, that's a really stupid thing to do. I think every intelligence agency in the US just had a heart attack.

If he really didn't want this to be used by those calling for an investigation, he really should have used 'guarded against' rather than just 'guarded'.

[Hanslanda]

All hail the Russian Hegemony. Making America great again, by making it part of Russia​!

For fuck's sake.

[smjjames]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/884016887692234753

Wow, that's a really stupid thing to do. I think every intelligence agency in the US just had a heart attack.

If he really didn't want this to be used by those calling for an investigation, he really should have used 'guarded against' rather than just 'guarded'.

The rest of the sentence goes "and safe."

They've also apparently come to a (toothless and non-binding since it's not on paper) 'agreement' to not meddle in each others domestic affairs and Putin 'promises' not to election hack the US again. Of course, nothing was said about not meddling in other countries affairs, and it almost sounds like he agreed to ignore Putin's meddling in other countries elections as that'd be 'meddling in domestic affairs'.

I had initially changed the thread title to "G20 proves Trump = Putin shill", but decided on something less oozing with liberal smugness, plus it was a bit of an overreaction and stating the obvious anyway.

We'll just have to see what happens in actual actions now.

[scriver]

All hail the Russian Hegemony. Making America great again, by making it part of Russia​!

For fuck's sake.

They have to protect the interests of the Russians in Alaska.

[martinuzz]

China not too happy with the US, after Trump adressed them as 'the Republic of China' during the G20, instead of 'the People's Republic of China'.
Very, very sensitive matter for China. 'the Republic of China' is the official name of Taiwan, which China does not recognize.

I can only imagine the poor behind the screens diplomats trying to explain to their Chinese colleagues that he didn't do that intentionally, but that it's just because he's literally clueless, because his IQ is so low.

[smjjames]

At worst, China will just grumble about it, though it does make the adminstration come off as amateurs, which they actually are.

Okay, maybe the correction might make them fume more because they changed it to 'President of China'. I can easily imagine them going 'WHICH China are you referring to here?!?!' since making a distinction between Taiwan and mainland China is of high importance to them. Also, they had accidentially called Abe of Japan the President of Japan rather than Prime Minister and mixed up the Singaporean PM with the Indonesian President.

A rare error could be forgiven, but when they have a practice of messing things up, it looks amateurish. Anybody remember Obama, G. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, H. W. Bush or Reagan consistently making this many mistakes within 6 months? I doubt it.

[Loud Whispers]

tbqhsmhf taiwan #1

In all honesty though this is incredibly valuable stuff, stuff like Trump being the first US President to contact the President of Taiwan since the US cut off diplomatic ties. It's a win-win, the Whitehouse can distance themselves from Trump as that being Trump retardation, whilst it can use Trump to be more aggressive in countering China's reef building efforts with the threat of Taiwan number 1ing the ocean