Re: NOT GOOD ENOUGH
Posted: Tue May 17, 2005 2:49 pm
True, but that won't stop him!MrsLam posted:
Fraggle, IDTWNACHAFCWTATA
WiganWarriorsFans.com
A site for fans of Wigan Warriors RLFC. News, views, statistics, profiles and more all contributed by supporters of Wigan RL.
https://www.wiganwarriorsfans.com/
NOT GOOD ENOUGH
Page 11 of 12
Re: NOT GOOD ENOUGH
Posted: Tue May 17, 2005 3:35 pm
wtfFraggle posted:I read this with no problem at all, unlike txtspk, but maybe the reason why I can read that but not txt is contained within that garbled post. Most txtspk seems to ignore or change the first or last letters, dat iz y I dnt no how 2 read da txt wrds. It also sounds very babyish, I was about 2 years old when I last used words like 'dat' and 'da', which seem to be common in a lot of internet messages these days.Doug Stand posted:
Just as an aside...
I cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg.
The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at
Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deson't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a
wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be
in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed
it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey
lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe
When I post I'm usually rushing which is why my spelling and grammer is bad... but I think most of you get what I'm saying.... even if it sometimes is a load of tripe
The other problem with txtspk is that there is no standard. We got a standard list of abbreviations in the early days of t'internet, so you got your IMOs, ROFLMOAs, TBHs, IIRCs, IDTYHAFCWYATAs and the like (ok, so I made the last one up but it's a thought I have when I read some messages on here and on other sites!). But the only person who knows exactly what is being abbreviated with txtspk is the person typing the original message. That means everything is open to interpretation depending on what you think the abbreviations mean.
Re: NOT GOOD ENOUGH
Posted: Tue May 17, 2005 3:43 pm
If we all started talking like that, there wouldn't be a need for moderators would there! Unless
WT*
ROFLM*O
WT*
ROFLM*O
Re: NOT GOOD ENOUGH
Posted: Tue May 17, 2005 3:48 pm
But that'd take the fun out of your day, i bet you cant wait to get on here after a match with all the people letting their emotions run wild, going through doing you moderating 
Re: NOT GOOD ENOUGH
Posted: Tue May 17, 2005 3:52 pm
Unfortunately not like that anymore, 'Warriors' isn't a regular visitor on here these days 
Re: NOT GOOD ENOUGH
Posted: Tue May 17, 2005 3:54 pm
give me a clue on ROFLM*OMrsLam posted:
If we all started talking like that, there wouldn't be a need for moderators would there! Unless
WT*
ROFLM*O
Re: NOT GOOD ENOUGH
Posted: Tue May 17, 2005 4:02 pm
roflmBOTTOMoff?
Re: NOT GOOD ENOUGH
Posted: Tue May 17, 2005 4:25 pm
It should be ROTFLMAOwaterside glens posted:give me a clue on ROFLM*OMrsLam posted:
If we all started talking like that, there wouldn't be a need for moderators would there! Unless
WT*
ROFLM*O
Roll On The Floor Laughing My Arse Off. (note the T after the O)
Have a look here:
http://www.mvps.org/PracticallyNerded/G ... Usenet.htm
Dave (Usenet veteran)
Re: NOT GOOD ENOUGH
Posted: Tue May 17, 2005 4:39 pm
Sorry Dave, my bad. I've not been on Usenet for a few years now. Do I need to type out the letter T 100 times as punishment?DaveO posted:
It should be ROTFLMAO
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT....
Re: NOT GOOD ENOUGH
Posted: Tue May 17, 2005 4:46 pm
IMHO, no.Fraggle posted:Sorry Dave, my bad. I've not been on Usenet for a few years now. Do I need to type out the letter T 100 times as punishment?DaveO posted:
It should be ROTFLMAO
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT....
Dave