AndreaH just now
Just another made-up acronym that hinders intelligent communications when many people do not know what it means and others cannot agree on what it means (That Fooking Guy...or The Former Guy). Why do we sink so low in communication skills?
Just another made-up acronym that hinders intelligent communications when many people do not know what it means and others cannot agree on what it means (That Fooking Guy...or The Former Guy). Why do we sink so low in communication skills?
Personally I am not able to even write the T word without horrible flashbacks. Even writing drumpf, his immigrant name from Germany not Sweden, makes me nauseous. It’s not a communication issue, Andrea H.
Acronyms do interfere greatly with communication. As I said above, they do to prose what a dead cow does to the stream it's lying in. Interrupt the flow; dirty the waters.
I WANT TO JOIN THIS EXCHANGE BY ADDING A COMMENT AND MY REPLY TO IT YESTERDAY:
TPJ (MA)17 hr ago
Gary DeathSentence could deliver more Electoral College votes from FL than the other two seditionists.
FERN MCBRIDE (NYC)15 hr ago
TPJ, I would like a favor from you. Subscribers are using acronyms, abbreviations, made up words, initials, etc., more and more. It is driving me crazy -- too demanding and too time consuming to figure out what the word is -- who's name it is??? I hold a lot of information in my head, along with names, lists, sources, etc.., so this other stuff is like dust that I have to keep clearing away. SO PLEASE USE NORMAL WORDS AND NAMES when exchanging with me. My patience has hit the WALL! Thanks T P J.
This pollution of mystery words, uncommon acronyms and a plethora of initials amount to a nuisance, at best, for me. When requests for clarity are met by attacks, it is time for recess. We come to the forum for exchanges. Newcomers join daily as well as subscribers who may withdrew in the face of the unfamiliar uses of words. While warmth and humor are welcome, the forum is not a coffee klatch. We come to reason with Heather's Letter, exchange ideas and provide information. Barriers to clear communication are simply that.
Annie, I understand. However, within the context of most of our forum discussions, there is only one DT. Granted, The Former Guy (TGF) is a cutesy acronym that if explained up front is gaining acceptance and has become commonly known and used by many within our forum. But the first time I read it, I was totally flummoxed. The original comment that used the TGF acronym was a failure to communicate. And as someone else pointed out, we need a glossary to keep up with the onslaught of newly created acronyms.
Relax, Andrea. Let go a little bit and please quit trying to make everyone meet your standards. I know some people have a bigger need than others to standardize things, but frankly, I think acceptance of the differences enables group bonding better than trying to make everybody think the same. I say this after decades of working with various groups trying to make both policy and practical decisions on matters that were significant to them.
Annie, Please read my comment below from yesterday. AndreaH is not alone. I think using this 'old friends' explanation amounts to a lack of respect for others. It troubles me to see attacks on someone who is making a legitimate request.
In most such cases it is a clear and very human communication of anger and personal frustration. It would seem that you are being extremely judgemental and highly restrictive on what communication should be and saying clearly that only your definition is permissabel. So intolerance!
Stuart, I understand that judge me as being judgmental when I cannot understand what the writer means with little known acronyms, so be it! You may be right, but that does not make the frustrating failure to communicate any more palatable. I enjoy the time I spend reading the forum comments for enlightenment and for the variety of opinion. Most of the contributors are educated and well-versed in history and political knowledge, far more so than am I. That is what I appreciate. But such knowledge and opinion is woefully garbled with the use of little known or totally unknown acronyms. Such is the sign of a lazy writer, or a writer who is not really concerned about whether or not his or her reader understands the ideas he or she is making, instead the writer can appear to be writing with little regard for the process of two-way communication. And that is certainly my opinion, in my judgement. I am not against using commonly known acronyms; I use them myself. When in doubt, I write the phrase, name, or title out and then in parenthesis the acronym such as Roane County Department of Education (RCDE). Having done that, the reader will now know what I mean throughout the rest of the comment when I use only RCDE.
Then I apologise as i think we all assume a similar level of knowledge when communicating here. Might i suggest that next time you ask what the letters mean quite simply rather than accuse the offending writer of "bad comm" . People here will respond gladly and with understanding.
That is exactly what I always do. I ask. My original comment was an answer to Susan, who asked, "Who is TFG?" Apparently my answer to her question led to a plethora of displeasure which prompted me to respond in kind.
Honestly - there are so very many other "acronyms" that COULD be used - this one is a fairly bland one. Seems more like nit picking than intolerance and perhaps stirring the pot?
I have to agree with Andrea. I'm a technical writer. The rule we use is, spell out the phrase the first time, with the acronym in parens. Then use the acronym in the rest of the text. Like this: " I can't write the name of The Former Guy (TFG) without a shudder of revulsion."
In tech especially, the blizzard of acronyms would otherwise be a barrier to comprehension.
I also do a lot of medical writing. I loath acronyms when they're not in common parlance, like DNA and MPG. It's easy enough to write out the former guy. (That took me less than a second.) As I said above, acronyms do to prose what a dead cow does to the stream it's lying in.
I have no problem understanding and using standard acronyms that are common, that I can feel comfortable that everyone knows. To use made up acronyms that are not commonly known is a failure to communicate.
It was a communal decision to shift to the Former Guy so we could avoid having the T name appear over an over. At the time there was a celebration that finally we'd found an innocuous way to refer to TFG without feeling drug through the morass. But of course, not everyone caught that shift, and to new folks it would appear to be just jargon. But I would suggest that when that happens, as it will, simply ask. Much more effective than self-righteous lecturing. (BTW, Elizabeth, by default I am a technical/science writer, too. This forum isn't the same thing. This is a bunch of folks doing our best to understand WTF (nope, not going to write that out) is going on. We've gotten to know each other as individuals: this is more than a forum because of that, and one reason new folks are able to join right in. So it's normal that we'd invent terms that facilitate conversation. Sorry we don't meet your expectations. Personally, the invention of TFG was a great relief for me. I also like that I don't have to look at TFG's face or listen to his voice.
Well said, Annie. Still, there are times when spelling out is good: do you want me to write DP, or Der Pu$$enGropenFuhrer? It's so much more visceral. I don't mind that extra effort!
Hard to know where to jump in here!! I can just say that using acronyms and such on here does not bother me much. I can let them go just like I let lapses in grammar, spelling, punctuation, etc. etc. My own personal opinion is: I am most interested in WHAT someone believes/thinks. If I can get the gist of what they are trying to say then that is what is most important to me rather being caught up in the minutiae of the words, grammar, spelling, etc. they use to express themselves. This is a comments section, not an academic page, people tend to use a more conversational style to get their thoughts across rather than adhering to Turabian, Chicago Manual of Style, or the OED (if you don't know what THAT is you should get out more...), or any other set of "rules" you may live by. I just overlook such lapses in the interest of expression. Meh. If you don't know what something is, ask. I don't tend to use that many acronyms anyway, but if someone doesn't know what one is I've used, then I am not at all put out to inform them. Not everybody will know them and THAT'S OKAY.
I'm less concerned about clear communication; acronyms are quite often used to reinforce tribalism and community, which is not necessarily a bad thing. But I think the name-calling and avoidance of using Trump's name is childish and I don't participate.
Yuck! If we want to be inclusive and encourage dialogue with those who might not share our exact views or who are not college English majors, it would serve this community better if folks were more tolerant. Yes words matter, more because of what they communicate. There is a formidable element of anti-intellectualism in our country and I know because of my communities that the sensitivity about feeling "stupid" is based on plenty of being treated that way. It's a huge learning curve for me to be careful with my words, but I recognize at least how crucial it is. I like that we are here to share ideas and leave the prose contest to the experts.
AndreaH just now
Just another made-up acronym that hinders intelligent communications when many people do not know what it means and others cannot agree on what it means (That Fooking Guy...or The Former Guy). Why do we sink so low in communication skills?
Personally I am not able to even write the T word without horrible flashbacks. Even writing drumpf, his immigrant name from Germany not Sweden, makes me nauseous. It’s not a communication issue, Andrea H.
Most people understand the acronym DT.
To me, DT means Delirium Tremens. Related distantly, perhaps, but I prefer the blandness of TFG. Much less triggering.
Acronyms do interfere greatly with communication. As I said above, they do to prose what a dead cow does to the stream it's lying in. Interrupt the flow; dirty the waters.
I WANT TO JOIN THIS EXCHANGE BY ADDING A COMMENT AND MY REPLY TO IT YESTERDAY:
TPJ (MA)17 hr ago
Gary DeathSentence could deliver more Electoral College votes from FL than the other two seditionists.
FERN MCBRIDE (NYC)15 hr ago
TPJ, I would like a favor from you. Subscribers are using acronyms, abbreviations, made up words, initials, etc., more and more. It is driving me crazy -- too demanding and too time consuming to figure out what the word is -- who's name it is??? I hold a lot of information in my head, along with names, lists, sources, etc.., so this other stuff is like dust that I have to keep clearing away. SO PLEASE USE NORMAL WORDS AND NAMES when exchanging with me. My patience has hit the WALL! Thanks T P J.
Fern, Thank you for weighing in on this topic.
This pollution of mystery words, uncommon acronyms and a plethora of initials amount to a nuisance, at best, for me. When requests for clarity are met by attacks, it is time for recess. We come to the forum for exchanges. Newcomers join daily as well as subscribers who may withdrew in the face of the unfamiliar uses of words. While warmth and humor are welcome, the forum is not a coffee klatch. We come to reason with Heather's Letter, exchange ideas and provide information. Barriers to clear communication are simply that.
Annie, I understand. However, within the context of most of our forum discussions, there is only one DT. Granted, The Former Guy (TGF) is a cutesy acronym that if explained up front is gaining acceptance and has become commonly known and used by many within our forum. But the first time I read it, I was totally flummoxed. The original comment that used the TGF acronym was a failure to communicate. And as someone else pointed out, we need a glossary to keep up with the onslaught of newly created acronyms.
Relax, Andrea. Let go a little bit and please quit trying to make everyone meet your standards. I know some people have a bigger need than others to standardize things, but frankly, I think acceptance of the differences enables group bonding better than trying to make everybody think the same. I say this after decades of working with various groups trying to make both policy and practical decisions on matters that were significant to them.
Annie, Please read my comment below from yesterday. AndreaH is not alone. I think using this 'old friends' explanation amounts to a lack of respect for others. It troubles me to see attacks on someone who is making a legitimate request.
'fraud-45' works for me.
Tolerance, tolerance...wherefore art thou?
It has nothing to do with tolerance; it is all the new and made-up acronyms that make no sense; A FAILURE TO COMMUNICATE!
In most such cases it is a clear and very human communication of anger and personal frustration. It would seem that you are being extremely judgemental and highly restrictive on what communication should be and saying clearly that only your definition is permissabel. So intolerance!
Stuart, I understand that judge me as being judgmental when I cannot understand what the writer means with little known acronyms, so be it! You may be right, but that does not make the frustrating failure to communicate any more palatable. I enjoy the time I spend reading the forum comments for enlightenment and for the variety of opinion. Most of the contributors are educated and well-versed in history and political knowledge, far more so than am I. That is what I appreciate. But such knowledge and opinion is woefully garbled with the use of little known or totally unknown acronyms. Such is the sign of a lazy writer, or a writer who is not really concerned about whether or not his or her reader understands the ideas he or she is making, instead the writer can appear to be writing with little regard for the process of two-way communication. And that is certainly my opinion, in my judgement. I am not against using commonly known acronyms; I use them myself. When in doubt, I write the phrase, name, or title out and then in parenthesis the acronym such as Roane County Department of Education (RCDE). Having done that, the reader will now know what I mean throughout the rest of the comment when I use only RCDE.
Then I apologise as i think we all assume a similar level of knowledge when communicating here. Might i suggest that next time you ask what the letters mean quite simply rather than accuse the offending writer of "bad comm" . People here will respond gladly and with understanding.
That is exactly what I always do. I ask. My original comment was an answer to Susan, who asked, "Who is TFG?" Apparently my answer to her question led to a plethora of displeasure which prompted me to respond in kind.
Honestly - there are so very many other "acronyms" that COULD be used - this one is a fairly bland one. Seems more like nit picking than intolerance and perhaps stirring the pot?
I have to agree with Andrea. I'm a technical writer. The rule we use is, spell out the phrase the first time, with the acronym in parens. Then use the acronym in the rest of the text. Like this: " I can't write the name of The Former Guy (TFG) without a shudder of revulsion."
In tech especially, the blizzard of acronyms would otherwise be a barrier to comprehension.
I also do a lot of medical writing. I loath acronyms when they're not in common parlance, like DNA and MPG. It's easy enough to write out the former guy. (That took me less than a second.) As I said above, acronyms do to prose what a dead cow does to the stream it's lying in.
I have no problem understanding and using standard acronyms that are common, that I can feel comfortable that everyone knows. To use made up acronyms that are not commonly known is a failure to communicate.
It was a communal decision to shift to the Former Guy so we could avoid having the T name appear over an over. At the time there was a celebration that finally we'd found an innocuous way to refer to TFG without feeling drug through the morass. But of course, not everyone caught that shift, and to new folks it would appear to be just jargon. But I would suggest that when that happens, as it will, simply ask. Much more effective than self-righteous lecturing. (BTW, Elizabeth, by default I am a technical/science writer, too. This forum isn't the same thing. This is a bunch of folks doing our best to understand WTF (nope, not going to write that out) is going on. We've gotten to know each other as individuals: this is more than a forum because of that, and one reason new folks are able to join right in. So it's normal that we'd invent terms that facilitate conversation. Sorry we don't meet your expectations. Personally, the invention of TFG was a great relief for me. I also like that I don't have to look at TFG's face or listen to his voice.
Communal decision, I didn't know about it and neither did plenty of others.
Thank you! for your clear communication. I agree. Tolerance is a great word for today.
Well said, Annie. Still, there are times when spelling out is good: do you want me to write DP, or Der Pu$$enGropenFuhrer? It's so much more visceral. I don't mind that extra effort!
Every group has their shorthand TLAs (Three Letter Acronyms). Until it becomes common I hope people will write it out the first time they use it.
We're going to need a glossary to keep up.
We all carry glossaries in our heads, and should augment them regularly.
It's a form of community identification. Either you know, or you don't know. A.k.a. Tribalism, for what it's worth.
we're not writing for the NYT. I enjoy the personalities here
Hard to know where to jump in here!! I can just say that using acronyms and such on here does not bother me much. I can let them go just like I let lapses in grammar, spelling, punctuation, etc. etc. My own personal opinion is: I am most interested in WHAT someone believes/thinks. If I can get the gist of what they are trying to say then that is what is most important to me rather being caught up in the minutiae of the words, grammar, spelling, etc. they use to express themselves. This is a comments section, not an academic page, people tend to use a more conversational style to get their thoughts across rather than adhering to Turabian, Chicago Manual of Style, or the OED (if you don't know what THAT is you should get out more...), or any other set of "rules" you may live by. I just overlook such lapses in the interest of expression. Meh. If you don't know what something is, ask. I don't tend to use that many acronyms anyway, but if someone doesn't know what one is I've used, then I am not at all put out to inform them. Not everybody will know them and THAT'S OKAY.
I'm less concerned about clear communication; acronyms are quite often used to reinforce tribalism and community, which is not necessarily a bad thing. But I think the name-calling and avoidance of using Trump's name is childish and I don't participate.
Acronyms do to prose what a dead cow does to the stream it's lying in. Best to avoid them unless they're in common parlance like DNA and MPG.
Yuck! If we want to be inclusive and encourage dialogue with those who might not share our exact views or who are not college English majors, it would serve this community better if folks were more tolerant. Yes words matter, more because of what they communicate. There is a formidable element of anti-intellectualism in our country and I know because of my communities that the sensitivity about feeling "stupid" is based on plenty of being treated that way. It's a huge learning curve for me to be careful with my words, but I recognize at least how crucial it is. I like that we are here to share ideas and leave the prose contest to the experts.
The former guy works for me.