# More Pretentious Jargon



## The Backward OX (May 11, 2010)

This time, it's "forum to wip word count ratio."

Ignoring wip, which I understand, can someone explain to this dummy wtf the rest of it means?

Thank you.


PS. I didn't make it up. It was copied and pasted from another post.


----------



## Kat (May 11, 2010)

Basically it's saying that there should more actual works of writing than discussion of writing.

In the context of the original quote not necessarily the piece you've chopped out right there.


----------



## Sigg (May 11, 2010)

I don't know the context but I read it as (Forum word count) / (WIP word count), where I assume Forum word count is all posts not related to your own WIP.  Although if you were emphasizing WIP word count you'd probably want it backwards.  At any rate, assuming Kat is correct, you'd want to maintain a ratio of less than 1.

It's funny that someone would break it down like that, and I also disagree with the statement anyhow.  Unless you are some sort of machine that pumps out writing and posts it on here at some absurd pace, or if you just don't get involved with other discussions, your "forum to wip word count ratio" will not be so good.


----------



## Ilasir Maroa (May 11, 2010)

It means the number of words you add to your wip each day versus the number of words you type in forum posts.  The point I was making was that the more words you post here, the less you add to your wip.  Basically, any sort of forum like this is going to be a distraction from the important thing, which is writing actual stories/novels/poems/lyrics.


----------



## moderan (May 11, 2010)

That's true, but forum posting is still writing, it is still communication, and in my eyes, just as valid. It's just easier to do. It takes protracted concentration to work effectively, and sometimes one can't do that. My laptop has a waterproof cover and I can bring it out by the pool.
I don't like how sections from my novels turn out when written poolside or on the bus or whatever-too much editing to make the style fit. Blogging or forum posting don't rely so much on consistent voice.


----------



## Linton Robinson (May 11, 2010)

> Basically, any sort of forum like this is going to be a distractionfrom the important thing, which is writing actualstories/novels/poems/lyrics.



Not necessarily.  Not at all.  For instance, much of what happens here is seeking feedback,  or learning about writing.  Or how to get the writing published--which is also an "important thiing" for many.  Not to mention networks and promotion.


----------



## Ilasir Maroa (May 11, 2010)

lin said:


> Not necessarily. Not at all. For instance, much of what happens here is seeking feedback, or learning about writing. Or how to get the writing published--which is also an "important thiing" for many. Not to mention networks and promotion.



That's all true, Lin.  But for a lot of people, forums or blogs about writing can start to take over writing time.  Plenty of published and unpublished authors advocate turning off the 'net for periods of time because they find it distracts them from writing.  There're no absolutes here.  The comment had a context that it has now been taken out of.


----------



## moderan (May 11, 2010)

Bruce likes that title entirely too much.


----------



## Sigg (May 11, 2010)

Ilasir Maroa said:


> That's all true, Lin. But for a lot of people, forums or blogs about writing can start to take over writing time. Plenty of published and unpublished authors advocate turning off the 'net for periods of time because they find it distracts them from writing. There're no absolutes here. The comment had a context that it has now been taken out of.




Yeah, the context has been lost from the original post, because now the thing sounds a bit absurd but in the original context it made sense in the discussion.


----------



## moderan (May 12, 2010)

So where's the original post, that nobody has been kind or thorough enough to link to?


----------



## Sigg (May 12, 2010)

moderan said:


> So where's the original post, that nobody has been kind or thorough enough to link to?


 
ah HA! I have found zee culprit! http://www.writingforums.com/showth...g-Discussion&p=1354117&viewfull=1#post1354117

After you read it you will probably have the same reaction I did... Why the crap did a whole thread get created to question that one little phrase?

Answer : There is no answer other than to point to the person who created the thread.


----------



## moderan (May 12, 2010)

Well, in so many words, yes. But we can't say whether or not someone else was interested in the whole conceptual thing. And it has to do with the prospective new board, which several people are definitely interested in, and that's why I bumped it.
Pointing fingers at the person, place, or thing that started the thread isn't my purpose here. It's the information gathering process.
Though, looking at the multiplicity of threads dealing with the subject, by the same author, makes me wonder. The thread title isn't extremely helpful either. I'd prefer something really catchy like "Snooty" or "Nose Way Up In The Air"...well, that last describes the Titanic also.
Maybe, just to make the point finer, w3 could continue the r3st of the thread in l33t. Or not


----------



## Sigg (May 12, 2010)

> "Nose Way Up In The Air"...well, that last describes the Titanic also.


 
That one is deserving of a golf clap, bravo.



> Maybe, just to make the point finer, w3 could continue the r3st of the thread in l33t.


 
|\|31|\| !!!


----------



## moderan (May 12, 2010)

|_0|_!


----------



## Sigg (May 12, 2010)

hah ok ok, before I get carried away I will stop myself from posting a picture of a lollercoaster or a roflcopter. No more nonsense mr moderan, it's serious time, put on yer game face.

EDIT :  holy cripes, it just started raining buckets out of nowhere... I'm like in the center of this giant manufacturing facility in my office and I can hear it pelting the building!


----------



## moderan (May 12, 2010)

Anyway, I think Ilasir's original point is perfectly valid. It's my reason casting a disapproving eye toward the discussion forum-the ratio of what Ox calls serious writing, as opposed to "fooling-around writing", or forum posting, etc. While I myself feel that forum posting is perfectly valid as it is writing and therefore helps to hone one's ability to communicate effectively, there is the danger that forum posting will eat into "productive" time, and also that discussing stories-in-progress will satisfy the urge to _tell the story_, and therefore the stories _won't get written_.


----------



## Sigg (May 12, 2010)

moderan said:


> Anyway, I think Ilasir's original point is perfectly valid. It's my reason casting a disapproving eye toward the discussion forum-the ratio of what Ox calls serious writing, as opposed to "fooling-around writing", or forum posting, etc. While I myself feel that forum posting is perfectly valid as it is writing and therefore helps to hone one's ability to communicate effectively, there is the danger that forum posting will eat into "productive" time, and also that discussing stories-in-progress will satisfy the urge to _tell the story_, and therefore the stories _won't get written_.



That may or may not be true, but it is on the writer/member to manage their own time and energy.  If people started getting treated like 5 year olds things will become unpleasant.


----------



## NathanBrazil (May 12, 2010)

When this topic came up before, I was under the impression that a lot of what kept people coming back is what is going on in the lounge.  Maybe I'm wrong but I would think that a strong feeling of community would be helpful.  A good balance of both would probably be the best.


----------



## Sigg (May 12, 2010)

Yeah I agree, but either way, it shouldn't be the role of the site or its moderators to force people to be more productive with their writing... The site provides facilities to do these things and promotes a community environment to interact with, but that should be the extent of it.


----------



## moderan (May 12, 2010)

Sigg said:


> That may or may not be true, but it is on the writer/member to manage their own time and energy.  If people started getting treated like 5 year olds things will become unpleasant.


 Where in that text does it say or imply that?


Sigg said:


> Yeah I agree, but either way, it shouldn't be the  role of the site or its moderators to force people to be more productive  with their writing... The site provides facilities to do these things  and promotes a community environment to interact with, but that should  be the extent of it.


Or that? You're completely misinterpreting the thrust of what i wrote.


----------



## Sigg (May 12, 2010)

my bad mod, I guess I did misunderstand what you were talking about.

EDIT : and actually now that I think about it, since I've become a moderator (despite not actually having done any real moderation) I haven't written anything new and haven't critiqued anyone's work.


----------



## Ilasir Maroa (May 12, 2010)

Sigg said:


> my bad mod, I guess I did misunderstand what you were talking about.
> 
> EDIT : and actually now that I think about it, since I've become a moderator (despite not actually having done any real moderation) I haven't written anything new and haven't critiqued anyone's work.




Sounds familiar.


----------



## moderan (May 12, 2010)

Which is why I was offsite for two hours. 3500 words later...here I am. Got a newsletter to work on next.


----------



## ppsage (May 12, 2010)

The Backward OX said:


> This time, it's "forum to wip word count ratio."





The Backward OX said:


> Ignoring wip, which I understand, can someone explain to this dummy wtf the rest of it means?
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> ...


 
Hard to believe, that I have resisted posting in this thread so long.

Jargon is merely a pejorative for technical nomenclature, the utility of which has been much demonstrated in very many fields, as it eases the presentation of complex ideas to an informed audience. Saves thousands of pages in science, business, law and so forth. The creation of technical nomenclature ought to be encouraged, it seems to this poster, if it's meaning is clear to it's audience and if it succeeds in creating a more efficient communication. If it manages as well, to be touched with the brush of humor, even better. I am, in this case, inclined to add my plaudits to the coiner.

That the posting in which the bit of nomenclature under discussion here was presented, where it served perfectly to express the notion of two sorts of writing and their relationship, without dragging down the main discussion about forum participation's (possible) deferred benefits, played a highly cogent role in an interesting thread only makes objection to it more difficult to understand.

Something becomes pretentious, I suppose, with a purpose to belittle for personal aggrandizement, and I personally find being asked to accept the above objection, on the basis of incomprehensibility, the height of curmudgeonaceous pretension. pp


----------



## The Backward OX (May 12, 2010)

moderan said:


> I'd prefer something really catchy like "Snooty" or "Nose Way Up In The Air"...well, that last describes the Titanic also.


Nose (Bow)??





Stern, methinks.


----------



## Sigg (May 12, 2010)

pp you always know just what to say


----------



## alanmt (May 12, 2010)

in the parlance of our time:

ppwned


----------



## The Backward OX (May 12, 2010)

ppsage said:


> I personally find being asked to accept the above objection, on the basis of incomprehensibility, the height of curmudgeonaceous pretension. pp


 
_Hrrmphh._ Where was the word, or even inference to, objection used, or implied?


----------



## Patrick (May 12, 2010)

ppsage said:


> Hard to believe, that I have resisted posting in this thread so long.
> 
> Jargon is merely a pejorative for technical nomenclature, the utility of which has been much demonstrated in very many fields, as it eases the presentation of complex ideas to an informed audience. Saves thousands of pages in science, business, law and so forth. The creation of technical nomenclature ought to be encouraged, it seems to this poster, if it's meaning is clear to it's audience and if it succeeds in creating a more efficient communication. If it manages as well, to be touched with the brush of humor, even better. I am, in this case, inclined to add my plaudits to the coiner.
> 
> ...


 

Pretension never shines through in ironic humour...


----------



## ppsage (May 12, 2010)

The Backward OX said:


> _Hrrmphh._ Where was the word, or even inference to, objection used, or implied?


 
The use of a term from a milder and more civil milieu like back-bench infighting was intended a sop to the decorum of our community. No doubt the malevolent hurling of such depreciatory and sniping commentary deserves a stronger epitaph, but that would seem to provide but slim basis for continuing objection camouflaged as application for clarification. pp


----------



## caelum (May 12, 2010)

ppsage said:


> Hard to believe, that I have resisted posting in this thread so long.
> 
> Jargon is merely a pejorative for technical nomenclature, the utility of which has been much demonstrated in very many fields, as it eases the presentation of complex ideas to an informed audience. Saves thousands of pages in science, business, law and so forth. The creation of technical nomenclature ought to be encouraged, it seems to this poster, if it's meaning is clear to it's audience and if it succeeds in creating a more efficient communication. If it manages as well, to be touched with the brush of humor, even better. I am, in this case, inclined to add my plaudits to the coiner.
> 
> ...


----------



## Sigg (May 12, 2010)

ppsage said:


> The use of a term from a milder and more civil milieu like back-bench infighting was intended a sop to the decorum of our community. No doubt the malevolent hurling of such depreciatory and sniping commentary deserves a stronger epitaph, but that would seem to provide but slim basis for continuing objection camouflaged as application for clarification. pp



+1, but I think you're just talkin' to a brick wall though, I'd save your breath if I were you.


----------



## The Backward OX (May 12, 2010)

As usual, Sigg doesn't get it.


----------



## moderan (May 12, 2010)

Curmudgeonaceous! The word of the day!


----------



## Sigg (May 12, 2010)

The Backward OX said:


> As usual, Sigg doesn't get it.



I see you took your Asshole Pill this morning, guess you're not _that_ senile yet.


----------



## Patrick (May 12, 2010)

caelum said:


>


 

Lol. Do you recognise that your humour is completely nuts, Caelum?


----------



## caelum (May 12, 2010)

Mermaid on the breakwater said:


> Lol. Do you recognise that your humour is completely nuts, Caelum?


----------



## ppsage (May 13, 2010)

Sigg said:


> +1, but I think you're just talkin' to a brick wall though, I'd save your breath if I were you.


 
One of my specialties. And there is probably little chance of a failure in my air supply. I actually often feel that my WIP to forum ratio is a constant; that both rise and fall together. But to be fair, in the many opportunities for repartee provided by the inimitable receding bovine, I have probably come down as often for as against. It's often a much more invigorating challenge, choosing him for ally. I would in this case however, assert that you have definately gotten it. pp


----------

