As a linguist, I agree with flashR about the text formatting (although being a linguist does not make what I say necessarily true, rather, I just want to present my point of view). Yes, internet is a free place, you can write your posts however you want, but I think we also reserve the right to criticize you for it. Sure, since you are not writing these posts in an official environment, it indeed makes more sense to form criticism on subjective criteria (
I don't like it because X, I prefer Y because Z) rather than on an objective one (
you are incorrect because X, it should be Y because Z). But that applies to you, Komo, so:
The way I type is very effective and easier to digest and more useful in a forum environment where people constantly quote each other, and need to look back at various threads for relative information.
This has no objective basis, you THINK it is effective, easier to digest and more useful in a forum environment, but the fact that I, one of your fellow forum readers, disagree with this notion proves that this is not an objective fact. I could say using five-word sentences is very effective and easier to digest (because shorter sentences), and more useful in a forum environment where most people have short attention span, but would you say it's an objective fact:
Folks, five words is enough. Five word sentences are fantastic. That I can tell you. And I am really smart. Believe me, I know words. I have the best words. Everyone agrees, and that's true. Now you look at Mexico. And you look at China. And you count their words. And it's too many, folks. Too many words, too many. Now I look into this crowd. And I see smart people. Smart people with five words. Maybe some who have six. But that's pushing it folks. I had Putin call me. He said, 'you know words'. 'How many should I use?' I said to use five. Because five words is enough. I can be so presidential. So presidential, with five words. It's tremendous, they tell me. Crooked Hillary uses too many. Always sick, too many words. You just can't trust her. Too many words to trust. Vote Trump, and believe me. We'll make America great again.Is there a universal law on how we should read and write on the internet?
No, but it's a bad arguement. I could write all my posts like this:
A vheclie exlpedod at a plocie cehckipont naer the UN haduqertares in Bagahdd on Mnoday kilinlg the bmober and an Irqai polcie offceir
And argue that I don't have to worry about correct spellings since most people can decipher every word, but that doesn't mean I should write like that.
I would also argue that proper paragraphing (in the linguistic sense) is better than double-spacing every sentence. It makes more sense to separate sentences by their content rather than separating them indiscriminately, because I think most people can find what they want to quote more easily that way. I assume you're suggesting that double-spacing each sentence makes it easier to quote because you can more easily see where a sentence begins and ends, but seriously, if you want to quote a particular sentence, how hard is it to delete the sentences before and after it? I think making it easier to find the sentence makes more sense in this respect.
By the way, maybe a better alternative would be to incorporate bullet lists in your posts? Bullet points are shorter than traditional paragraphs, and you can even group them using sub-bullet points. I would argue that the
new official Darts description is better formatted for most people than
the old one.
Hope you guys don't mind me barging into your flame war lol, I just really love linguistics.