Flaming?

[ZoeTick]

Having reviewed the extensive, but almost exclusively politically correct, anti-discriminatory, and hyper-sensitive, corpus of work attempting to define "flaming", generally by offering examples of situations where it is blatantly obvious that the supposedly unbiased commentator has an axe to grind, I have attempted to extract the essence of the interpretation of the concept by those given the power to label behaviour as such.

Simply, it appears to mean "you made my stupid friend feel bad".

Would you like to offer your own definition?

[irihapeti]

[Theresa Tennyson]

---

ZoeTick wrote:

Having reviewed the extensive, but almost exclusively politically correct, anti-discriminatory, and hyper-sensitive, corpus of work attempting to define "flaming", generally by offering examples of situations where it is blatantly obvious that the supposedly unbiased commentator has an axe to grind, I have attempted to extract the essence of the interpretation of the concept by those given the power to label behaviour as such.

Simply, it appears to mean "you made my stupid friend feel bad".

Would you like to offer your own definition?

---

Moot; you've just done it for us.

[KarenMichelle Lane]

---

ZoeTick wrote:

Having reviewed the extensive, but almost exclusively politically correct, anti-discriminatory, and hyper-sensitive, corpus of work attempting to define "flaming", generally by offering examples of situations where it is blatantly obvious that the supposedly unbiased commentator has an axe to grind, I have attempted to extract the essence of the interpretation of the concept by those given the power to label behaviour as such.

Simply, it appears to mean "you made my stupid friend feel bad".

Would you like to offer your own definition?

---

This is my fave kind of Flaming........

..any similarity to the OPs name is purely coincidental

[Dresden Ceriano]

---

ZoeTick wrote:.

Would you like to offer your own definition?

---

No... I'm too busy grinding my axe.

...Dres  (That is a euphemism, right?)

[Griffin Ceawlin]

---

ZoeTick wrote:

Simply, it appears to mean "you made my stupid friend feel bad".

---

So it's a synonym for "bullying" and "trolling," too, then. Some hypersensitive souls even call it "terrorism."

[Dresden Ceriano]

---

Griffin Ceawlin wrote:

---

ZoeTick wrote:

Simply, it appears to mean "you made my stupid friend feel bad".

---

So it's a synonym for "bullying" and "trolling," too, then. Some hypersensitive souls even call it "terrorism."

---

Stop raping me!!!

...Dres

[Griffin Ceawlin]

LOL. OMG, I can't even.

[Venus Petrov]

---

ZoeTick wrote:

Simply, it appears to mean "you made my stupid friend feel bad".

Would you like to offer your own definition?

---

I think it's closer to 'you reminded me how stupid my friends are so what does that make me, huh!?'

[Perrie Juran]

---

ZoeTick wrote:

Having reviewed the extensive, but almost exclusively politically correct

,

anti-discriminatory

,

and hyper-sensitive

,

corpus of work attempting to define "flaming", generally by offering examples of situations where it is blatantly obvious that the supposedly unbiased commentator has an axe to grind, I have attempted to extract the essence of the interpretation of the concept by those given the power to label behaviour as such.

I BELIEVE YOU HAVE TWO TOO MANY COMAS THERE.

 

Would you like to offer your own definition?

 

NO!

---

 

[KarenMichelle Lane]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

ZoeTick wrote:

Having reviewed the extensive, but almost exclusively politically correct

,

anti-discriminatory

,

and hyper-sensitive

,

corpus of work attempting to define "flaming", generally by offering examples of situations where it is blatantly obvious that the supposedly unbiased commentator has an axe to grind, I have attempted to extract the essence of the interpretation of the concept by those given the power to label behaviour as such.

I BELIEVE YOU HAVE TWO TOO MANY COMAS THERE.

 

Would you like to offer your own definition?

 

NO!

---

 

Oh that's the trick.... Insert a Coma into the sentence. How long should each of the the comas be for? Who will wake us from the coma? Doesn't too long a coma cause us to lose perspective about the sentence we read before entering into the coma? What if we never awake from the coma? When reading the paragraph with the inserted comas, are we allowed to re-read the previous text when we awake?

I'm so confused!!!!!!

[Lexia Moonstone]

---

KarenMichelle Lane wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

ZoeTick wrote:

Having reviewed the extensive, but almost exclusively politically correct

,

anti-discriminatory

,

and hyper-sensitive

,

corpus of work attempting to define "flaming", generally by offering examples of situations where it is blatantly obvious that the supposedly unbiased commentator has an axe to grind, I have attempted to extract the essence of the interpretation of the concept by those given the power to label behaviour as such.

I BELIEVE YOU HAVE TWO TOO MANY COMAS THERE.

 

Would you like to offer your own definition?

 

NO!

---

 

Oh that's the trick.... Insert a Coma into the sentence. How long should each of the the comas be for? Who will wake us from the coma? Doesn't too long a coma cause us to lose perspective about the sentence we read before entering into the coma? What if we never awake from the coma? When reading the paragraph with the inserted comas, are we allowed to re-read the previous text when we awake?

I'm so confused!!!!!!

---

http://blogs.sap.com/innovation/sales-marketing/thanks-social-media-average-attention-span-now-shorter-goldfish-01251966

I forgot what I was going to say.

[Perrie Juran]

---

KarenMichelle Lane wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

ZoeTick wrote:

Having reviewed the extensive, but almost exclusively politically correct

,

anti-discriminatory

,

and hyper-sensitive

,

corpus of work attempting to define "flaming", generally by offering examples of situations where it is blatantly obvious that the supposedly unbiased commentator has an axe to grind, I have attempted to extract the essence of the interpretation of the concept by those given the power to label behaviour as such.

I BELIEVE YOU HAVE TWO TOO MANY COMAS THERE.

 

Would you like to offer your own definition?

 

NO!

---

 

Oh that's the trick.... Insert a Coma into the sentence. How long should each of the the comas be for? Who will wake us from the coma? Doesn't too long a coma cause us to lose perspective about the sentence we read before entering into the coma? What if we never awake from the coma? When reading the paragraph with the inserted comas, are we allowed to re-read the previous text when we awake?

I'm so confused!!!!!!

---

I know it's rough being comatose.  

[ZoeTick]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

 

I BELIEVE YOU HAVE TWO TOO MANY COMMAS THERE.

 

---

 I don't believe I do.

 

 

[Perrie Juran]

---

ZoeTick wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

 

I BELIEVE YOU HAVE TWO TOO MANY COMMAS THIER.

 

---

 I don't believe I do.

 

 

---

my bad: i've corrected my spelling now

[Pamela Galli]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

ZoeTick wrote:

Having reviewed the extensive, but almost exclusively politically correct

,

anti-discriminatory

,

and hyper-sensitive

,

corpus of work attempting to define "flaming", generally by offering examples of situations where it is blatantly obvious that the supposedly unbiased commentator has an axe to grind, I have attempted to extract the essence of the interpretation of the concept by those given the power to label behaviour as such.

I BELIEVE YOU HAVE TWO TOO MANY COMAS THERE.

 

Would you like to offer your own definition?

 

NO!

---

 

---

One.

[ZoeTick]

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

One.

---

I am sorry Pam, but I have to disagree with you.

In addition to the list commas, there's an optional, but correct, Oxford comma, and also an appositive comma, as demonstrated near the beginning of this deliberately convoluted sentence.

The test I generally apply for the application of an appositive comma is whether you could replace it, and the opening clause comma, with parentheses.

Like this:

The test I generally apply for the application of an appositive comma is whether you could replace it (and the opening clause comma) with parentheses.

For ESLers who are interested in furthering their understanding of a paradoxically arcane but still developing language, as well as those who slept through English 101 thru 109, this webpage - and the rest of its associated site - offers clear help.

Not that you need it, Pam, although I would agree with what I presume is your underlying conviction, that too many commas (and parentheses) - and even hyphenated clauses - are an indication of pretentiousness of style and possibly intentional obfuscation of meaning.

[ZoeTick]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

ZoeTick wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

 

I BELIEVE YOU HAVE TWO TOO MANY COMMAS THIER.

 

---

 I don't believe I do.

 

 

---

my bad: i've corrected my spelling now

---

As an aside, I do not believe it is possible to flame a grammar nazi . . .

. . . other than by the use of egregious LOLcats.

Although perhaps you should note this press release from the Society Of Feline Typists (henceforth known as the SOFTies)

[Jumpman Lane]

I knew an expert on such innanet behavior...but his name escapes meh! hehehehe

[Pamela Galli]

It depends on what precise nuance of meaning you want to give, I suppose. Contrary to popular belief, punctuation is not merely decorative but enables us to "hear" inflection, tone, and emphasis, and thus clarifies meaning.*  Commas sometimes depend not on sentence structure but simply where you want the reader's voice to pause (perhaps for emphasis). Personally, I depend on dashes, to the point of overuse, because I like more emphatic pauses.

(And btw I am a violent supporter of the Oxford comma.)

I think any ambiguity about punctuating this sentence would be cleared up by moving the appositive clause forward (and I think also maybe putting it in parentheses). See what you think:

Having reviewed the extensive, anti-discriminatory, and hyper-sensitive, but almost exclusively politically correct, corpus of work attempting to define "flaming", generally by offering examples of situations where it is blatantly obvious that the supposedly unbiased commentator has an axe to grind, I have attempted to extract the essence of the interpretation of the concept by those given the power to label behaviour as such.

ALTHOUGH I also have to agree with Perrie that the first two commas could be omitted and still be correct, depending on whether you want the reader to pause for emphasis or not:

Having reviewed the extensive anti-discriminatory and hyper-sensitive, but almost exclusively politically correct, corpus of work attempting to define "flaming", generally by offering examples of situations where it is blatantly obvious that the supposedly unbiased commentator has an axe to grind, I have attempted to extract the essence of the interpretation of the concept by those given the power to label behaviour as such.

You could even omit the comma after "correct" without changing meaning:

Having reviewed the extensive anti-discriminatory and hyper-sensitive, but almost exclusively politically correct corpus of work attempting to define "flaming", generally by offering examples of situations where it is blatantly obvious that the supposedly unbiased commentator has an axe to grind, I have attempted to extract the essence of the interpretation of the concept by those given the power to label behaviour as such.

Again, it depends on how you want the reader to hear/understand it.

 

* I found that the ONLY way to teach many students where a period goes is to have them read their work aloud and listen for when their voices dropped a little. No amount of sentence diagramming helped, but listening for that drop did.

 

That said, IMO forum posts should get a little punctuation and spelling grace -- as long as the meaning is still clear, which too often it most certainly is not.

[Qie Niangao]

---

Jumpman Lane wrote:

I knew an expert on such innanet behavior...but his name escapes meh! hehehehe

---

Jumpy! His name escaping you is one thing, but nothing compared to your own escape. Welcome back!

[Perrie Juran]

---

ZoeTick wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

ZoeTick wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

 

I BELIEVE YOU HAVE TWO TOO MANY COMMAS THIER.

 

---

 I don't believe I do.

 

 

---

my bad: i've corrected my spelling now

---

As an aside, I do not believe it is possible to flame a grammar nazi . . .

. . . other than by the use of egregious LOLcats.

Although perhaps you should note this press release from the Society Of Feline Typists (henceforth known as the SOFTies)

 

---

Flame?

I wasn't 'flaming' if that is what you are insinuating.

I was just having fun.

[ZoeTick]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

ZoeTick wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

ZoeTick wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

 

I BELIEVE YOU HAVE TWO TOO MANY COMMAS THIER.

 

---

 I don't believe I do.

 

 

---

my bad: i've corrected my spelling now

---

As an aside, I do not believe it is possible to flame a grammar nazi . . .

. . . other than by the use of egregious LOLcats.

Although perhaps you should note this press release from the Society Of Feline Typists (henceforth known as the SOFTies)

 

---

Flame?

I wasn't 'flaming' if that is what you are insinuating.

I was just having fun.

---

I wasn't insinuating anything. In fact I was stating that you could not be flaming me.

And yes, I recognised that you were having fun; as was I; as was the intent of this thread.

[ZoeTick]

---

Jumpman Lane wrote:

I knew an expert on such innanet behavior...but his name escapes meh! hehehehe

---

I am sure your memory is better than you claim, Jumpy.

You can't spend that amount of time banged up in the Second Citizen cornfield without your cellmates' names becoming ingrained in your psyche.

Your jailers on the other hand . . .who remembers them?

[ZoeTick]

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

It depends on what precise nuance of meaning you want to give, I suppose.

---

Absolutely.

And I think very hard about such matters before I set my fingers to the keyboard.

And I think even harder while reviewing the first draft, and any subsequent ones.

I agree with most, if not all, of what you say, Pam.

And you, or Perrie, or anybody else may believe that I have used  too much, or too little, or even the wrong punctuation, but you would not have thought about what I wanted to convey as much as I have, and I do not make "errors".

So criticism is rather futile.

But may not by any means be considered flaming.