Opinion Does anyone else hate text chat?

[HowlingWoods]

'soz'


'thnx'


'B4'


'c u'


Why are all of these "words" recognized by my spell check filter?


These aren't words. They're not even abbreviations. 'FBI' is an abbreviation for 'Federal Bureau of Investigation'. 'USB' is an abbreviation for 'Universal Serial Bus'. Those are abbreviations.


'B4' is not an abbreviation for before. It's a sad excuse for a word, and it sickens me that people find a reason to need to abbreviate something that takes less than a second to type on a computer, and at most two seconds to type on a phone if you type EXTREMELY slow.


My concern is that using text chat is part of the reason why our society is beginning to grow illiterate and lazy. If we're too lazy to type something that takes a second or less to type out, then how can we expect to go to work and make a living? If we start using those abbreviations one our resume, you can sure as hell bet we're never getting hired. Why does one think it's okay to use text chat when talking informally, but not in formal situations? Surely, if we're going to practice a bad habit that makes us illiterate and lazy, we should practice it everywhere we go, right?


It's sad, as well, that entering an environment where people should be practicing literacy and competency such as a role play site, and finding people using illogical, illiterate text chat replies such as 'soz'. Is this not just as formal of an environment as that email you sent to your boss?


I invite the members of RP nation to gather here and debate whether or not text chat is beneficial or hurtful to our society, or if it does not have an effect at all. Use of cited sources, quotes, and other debate elements are permitted and encouraged.


Please avoid growing too emotionally attached to your opinion. We're here to have a debate, not a war. If you're looking for an argument, look elsewhere. I think I saw a few hundred of them on Chatango.

 

[Delzmore]

It is hurtful because shortening words is beyond lazy. I don't mind "lol", "wtf" or "OMG" but words like "u r so cute" make me cringe...I hate that. I prefer to write out the word.

 

[sorrow made you]

They're not really abbreviations, but rather a play on sounds that make words in the English language. Play on phonetics. But anyways.


Pretty sure it was mainly used over phone text originally, which once upon a time, was convenient. But more than anything it was a trend. When typing on the computer, yes, it's a lazy shortcut. However, I use 'lol' and 'nb4' ( "and before" ) a lot in casual conversation because it's just word flair. It's a preference, just like saying "hella" in speech or something.


Now, I'm not saying that these phonetically symbolic words are good, because they're not. I can't tell you how many exams I graded for my professor and they (students) shortened words with those. I'm talking about upper division university coursework. It made me facepalm so hard. It's embarrassing when used in more important aspects of one's life. It makes one seem uneducated, only because education and literacy is based off of fully conceptualized words.


So, my tl;dr, there's a time and place for everything, including using word shorteners. If you have time to write a response, you probably have the time to write out full words. But also keep in mind of whether it's a flavoring tool for someone.


Edit;; excuse all my spelling errors. My phone hates me.

 

[HowlingWoods]

[QUOTE="Naruto Uzumaki]It is hurtful because shortening words is beyond lazy. I don't mind "lol", "wtf" or "OMG" but words like "u r so cute" make me cringe...I hate that. I prefer to write out the word.

[/QUOTE]
'lol' 'wtf' and 'omg' are all abbreviations, not text chat. An abbreviation is made when you take the first letter of every word in a phrase (excluding articles such as 'of' and 'the') and put them together in order to shorten the original phrase to only one word or group of letters. I have no problem with those because they aren't technically text chat. They're abbreviations, and can be defended by logic because there is actually a somewhat significant time difference between how long it takes to type 'Laughing Out Loud' compared to 'LOL'.


'u' and 'r' are not abbreviations. As CRiTiCAL ERROR stated, they're a play on phonetics. And that's not the same thing as a pun. I'm not entirely sure what to call things such as 'soz' or 'thnx' since they don't really make sense phonetically.

[QUOTE="CRiTiCAL ERR0R]They're not really abbreviations, but rather a play on sounds that make words in the English language. Play on phonetics. But anyways.
Pretty sure it was mainly used over phone text originally, which once upon a time, was convenient. But more than anything it was a trend. When typing on the computer, yes, it's a lazy shortcut. However, I use 'lol' and 'nb4' ( "and before" ) a lot in casual conversation because it's just word flair. It's a preference, just like saying "hella" in speech or something.


Now, I'm not saying that these phonetically symbolic words are good, because they're not. I can't tell you how many exams I graded for my professor and they (students) shortened words with those. I'm talking about upper division university coursework. It made me facepalm so hard. It's embarrassing when used in more important aspects of one's life. It makes one seem uneducated, only because education and literacy is based off of fully conceptualized words.


So, my tl;dr, there's a time and place for everything, including using word shorteners. If you have time to write a response, you probably have the time to write out full words. But also keep in mind of whether it's a flavoring tool for someone.


Edit;; excuse all my spelling errors. My phone hates me.

[/QUOTE]
Personally, I understand the idea of speech preferences. For example, sometimes (if I'm feeling playful for some reason) I will say 'ello instead of 'hello'. I think this originated when I was younger and my dad scolded me for saying 'hell' when I had actually said 'hello' and he misheard me. I don't do it all the time, but I do it often.


I think I can agree with your opinion to a large degree, but I also am torn between whether the fact that it's considered acceptable in common speech is what confuses people and makes them believe it's also acceptable in formal language. If that's the case, then maybe we should stop accepting it in common speech so that such confusion is no longer a problem?

 

[Reine]

I don't think its making us less literate. Getting a phone/using that type of speech does not mean you become less intelligent. A phone itself is a way of communication, and should never be compared to writing which isn't necessary, is a hobby, and has little to no time expectancy. If you want to ask someone to pick something up for you, "can u get 2 boxes of it 4 me" isn't unacceptable. It serves its purpose without taking up time. While "can u gt 2 bxs o it 4 me" is a bit unreasonable, simply because it is difficult to understand, the former example can be understood and saves time.


I also know that I use text talk with friends, as a way of showing that I'm joking, even though I don't have a phone.


"can u get 2 boxes of it 4 me" is not something you can easily send to your boss, but its acceptable for a friend or relative.


If someone wants to do it, they can do it. If you don't like it, you don't have to talk to them.

 

[HowlingWoods]

I don't think its making us less literate. Getting a phone/using that type of speech does not mean you become less intelligent. A phone itself is a way of communication, and should never be compared to writing which isn't necessary, is a hobby, and has little to no time expectancy. If you want to ask someone to pick something up for you, "can u get 2 boxes of it 4 me" isn't unacceptable. It serves its purpose without taking up time. While "can u gt 2 bxs o it 4 me" is a bit unreasonable, simply because it is difficult to understand, the former example can be understood and saves time.
I also know that I use text talk with friends, as a way of showing that I'm joking, even though I don't have a phone.


"can u get 2 boxes of it 4 me" is not something you can easily send to your boss, but its acceptable for a friend or relative.


If someone wants to do it, they can do it. If you don't like it, you don't have to talk to them.

I can see your point. My problem isn't that I dislike talking to people who use text chat, as long as it's readable, but I want to know if this could be affecting our intelligence or literacy as a whole. CRiTiCAL ERROR mentioned earlier that he's seen people using text chat is college essays, and I'm curious if the best way to eradicate issues like this where people don't know when it's okay to use it and when it's not might be simply to have everyone stop using it all together. I'm experimenting with options. I'm not trying to dis people.

 

[TeaMMatE11]

I can see your point. My problem isn't that I dislike talking to people who use text chat, as long as it's readable, but I want to know if this could be affecting our intelligence or literacy as a whole. CRiTiCAL ERROR mentioned earlier that he's seen people using text chat is college essays, and I'm curious if the best way to eradicate issues like this where people don't know when it's okay to use it and when it's not might be simply to have everyone stop using it all together. I'm experimenting with options. I'm not trying to dis people.

When to use "text language" is simply common sense, which unfortunately, most millennials don't have. Like that upper division university example, it's common sense that you don't put that kind of language on a ESSAY. That's just stupid. But texting shortcuts (while being readable) to friends or relatives are ok. What we really need, is to teach kids common sense, unfortunately.

 

[thoughtless]

I don't really think it has much of an effect on society as long as people aren't using it in essays or reports, and really that's the only thing I have to say on the matter. If I'm in a chat room, or I'm texting a friend or anything similar to those situations, I'm most likely going to use text chat. It's faster for me a get a message out and it still makes sense 95% of the time to the person whose reading it. If I'm writing a post , essay, or some other paper, I'm probably not going to use it because it's not the right situation.


Just because I use text chat sometimes doesn't mean it's harder for me to read or write, I don't unlearn those skills over time unless I'm constantly always using text chat. So no, I don't think it really affects our society to a degree that we should be worried about.


I couldn't really tell you why people are illiterate, as I am someone who reads and writes as a hobby. I think both of the problems lie in the school system unable to get kids actually interested in learning and because there are a few students that are unwilling to learn. I think school should be a lot more hands on, instead of just shoving these facts down your throat and expecting you to remember them. I also think the majority of everything that we learn in math class is useless unless you decide to go into engineering or sciences.


And I'd prefer if people stayed away from generalizing millennials when the oldest people of our generation are as old as 36 and 35. If you're basing that off of college students who are now having their first true taste of independence from their parents and being off on their own in their lives, or actual teenagers in high school who still have developing brains and are prone to make a few stupid mistakes, then that opinion is highly flawed.

 

[HowlingWoods]

When to use "text language" is simply common sense, which unfortunately, most millennials don't have. Like that upper division university example, it's common sense that you don't put that kind of language on a ESSAY. That's just stupid. But texting shortcuts (while being readable) to friends or relatives are ok. What we really need, is to teach kids common sense, unfortunately.

I second this.


I feel like my opinion is changing as I realize how short-sighted I can be. I wonder how many times it'll take for me to realize I'm being shortsighted before I actually fix the issue...

I don't really think it has much of an effect on society as long as people aren't using it in essays or reports, and really that's the only thing I have to say on the matter. If I'm in a chat room, or I'm texting a friend or anything similar to those situations, I'm most likely going to use text chat. It's faster for me a get a message out and it still makes sense 95% of the time to the person whose reading it. If I'm writing a post , essay, or some other paper, I'm probably not going to use it because it's not the right situation.
Just because I use text chat sometimes doesn't mean it's harder for me to read or write, I don't unlearn those skills over time unless I'm constantly always using text chat. So no, I don't think it really affects our society to a degree that we should be worried about.


I couldn't really tell you why people are illiterate, as I am someone who reads and writes as a hobby. I think both of the problems lie in the school system unable to get kids actually interested in learning and because there are a few students that are unwilling to learn. I think school should be a lot more hands on, instead of just shoving these facts down your throat and expecting you to remember them. I also think the majority of everything that we learn in math class is useless unless you decide to go into engineering or sciences.


And I'd prefer if people stayed away from generalizing millennials when the oldest people of our generation are as old as 36 and 35. If you're basing that off of college students who are now having their first true taste of independence from their parents and being off on their own in their lives, or actual teenagers in high school who still have developing brains and are prone to make a few stupid mistakes, then that opinion is highly flawed.

I'm not going to say anything about the millennials as I just learned what that even meant about a week ago, and I know nothing of how people stereotype millennials or the opposing opinions on the terms. What I mean is, I'm staying out of this.


I think I'm switching sides. It's not beneficial, but it may not be entirely hurtful, either. I'm starting to think this is more of an issue of common sense rather than text chat.


However, I must question, can common sense be taught? I mean, it's called 'common sense' because it's a sense that everyone is supposed to have. Triple emphasis on supposed.





Isn't the level of common sense you have innate? Can those levels be changed by outside influences?

 

[kianainactive1234]

I don't feel like they make the general populous illiterate, I for one use text chat when texting friends and people I am close to, but abstain from that uber casual way of text when composing an email or writing a response to a roleplay. Some people definitely don't know where to draw the line with using text chat and are actually just lazy and thus use text chat to fuel that laziness, but I have found that most people who use text chat can also be wonderful writers.

 

[thoughtless]

I second this.
I feel like my opinion is changing as I realize how short-sighted I can be. I wonder how many times it'll take for me to realize I'm being shortsighted before I actually fix the issue...


I'm not going to say anything about the millennials as I just learned what that even meant about a week ago, and I know nothing of how people stereotype millennials or the opposing opinions on the terms. What I mean is, I'm staying out of this.


I think I'm switching sides. It's not beneficial, but it may not be entirely hurtful, either. I'm starting to think this is more of an issue of common sense rather than text chat.


However, I must question, can common sense be taught? I mean, it's called 'common sense' because it's a sense that everyone is supposed to have. Triple emphasis on supposed.





Isn't the level of common sense you have innate? Can those levels be changed by outside influences?

Common sense is defined as, from multiple sources, a good sense and sound judgment in practical matters or in much more basic terms, normal native intelligence, and the ability to think and behave in a reasonable way and to make good decisions.


Going by those definitions, what might be common sense to one person, would not be common sense to another person if they grew up in different places.


For example, someone who lives in a city, urban area may know to not do this or that because it's simply something you shouldn't do. For someone who lived in a much different place, they wouldn't know that they weren't suppose to do those things.


A less vague example would be that in Japan, they take their shoes off and put them by the door when they enter the house. To someone in Japan, this would be "common sense".


If someone who lived in America moved to Japan, there is a high chance that they would not know this and thus, to anyone who lived in Japan, it would seem that the American lacked common sense and was being rude.


To put all of that into one simple sentence; Common sense is defined by where you live, and is highly subjective because of that fact.


So yes, there are some generally basic ideas of what you should and shouldn't do in a modern society, but a lot of them aren't really as common as we'd like to think.

 

[Myxyzptlk]

To sum it up for you no one is going to get damaged so long as it is used in the appropriate situation. It's quite literally impossible to say that our intelligence can lower because of text speech. You mentioned before how CRiTICAL ERROR saw it in college essays but rest assured their intelligence is not affected, rather the problem rests in the fact that they are used to using text speech on a daily basis and end up putting that into their writing. For example, if I asked the people who used text speech who the first president of the United States was they would reply with "George Washington" and they'd be correct.


It becomes a problem when it does occur on say the college essays because they have grown accustomed to writing in the text speech more frequently than they are using full words. For casual conversation or even a letter to a friend text speech is completely acceptable but if that letter was to be to your boss they would not take it lightly. As much as I don't want to be blatent and call you "ignorant" for thinking it could actually lower someones intelligence I don't know any other words since it isn't hard to put two and two together and know the answer is "No.". Long story short is, there are times when it is perfectly acceptable and times where you should not dare to think about it.

 

[Fus ro dah]

I cannot stand it. The only time I use it is in a situation where I'm either goofing around or need to reply to a text extremely fast. Even then I feel dirty xD No one gets hurt by it, but in my eyes (and the eyes of many others) it denotes a lack of intelligence. Phones and keyboards both have every letter of the English alphabet on it. There's no excuse.

 

[thoughtless]

It's ridiculous and judgemental to say that text chat = not intelligent when there's quite literally no factual research to support such an idea. And I don't think it's lazy to do such a thing either. It's simply using a different and faster way to say something and still get the same point across, just using fewer letters. And anything it's more efficient than typing out each and every word and punctuation.


If people only use it a few times when typing out a quick, short and concise message, there's nothing to get upset about if you're still able to fully understand the message.

 

[HowlingWoods]

I think the point has been made. If everyone thinks the same thing, I don't see any more reason to have a debate open about this.


I can't exactly close the thread, but I will ask that everyone refrain from posting again unless they have a new opinion that hasn't already been stated to contribute. I feel like we've all become unanimous.

 

[Fus ro dah]

It's ridiculous and judgemental to say that text chat = not intelligent when there's quite literally no factual research to support such an idea. And I don't think it's lazy to do such a thing either. It's simply using a different and faster way to say something and still get the same point across, just using fewer letters. And anything it's more efficient than typing out each and every word and punctuation.
If people only use it a few times when typing out a quick, short and concise message, there's nothing to get upset about if you're still able to fully understand the message.

I'm allowed to have an opinion. If you used text speak in a resume, cover letter or college paper you'd be laughed at. I judge people based on spelling. If they have a learning disorder, then I understand, but there's rarely an excuse, especially at a computer to be lazy and use text speak.


/rant

 

[TeaMMatE11]

[QUOTE="Fus ro dah]I'm allowed to have an opinion. If you used text speak in a resume, cover letter or college paper you'd be laughed at. I judge people based on spelling. If they have a learning disorder, then I understand, but there's rarely an excuse, especially at a computer to be lazy and use text speak.
/rant

[/QUOTE]
Using text language on an official document is different than using it when texting with friends. People who write with text language are dumb. It's different, and should be differentiated.

 

[Myxyzptlk]

[QUOTE="Fus ro dah]I'm allowed to have an opinion. If you used text speak in a resume, cover letter or college paper you'd be laughed at. I judge people based on spelling. If they have a learning disorder, then I understand, but there's rarely an excuse, especially at a computer to be lazy and use text speak.
/rant

[/QUOTE]
Though that is absolutely true you are entitled to your opinion it is incorrect. His point is that you cannot lose any intelligence by speaking in text speech, there are no studies proving it. I also made the point that someone who writes text speech on their college essay would have done it because they are used to seeing text speech on a consistent basis, that does not deteriorate intelligence. I also said that if I asked a person who texts with just English who the first president of the United States was they would say "George Washington" if I walked up to someone who writes in text speech and asked the same question they would reply with the same answer.

 

[Myxyzptlk]

Using text language on an official document is different than using it when texting with friends. People who write with text language are dumb. It's different, and should be differentiated.

Look at my previous posts, I'm done at this point.

 

[TeaMMatE11]

Look at my previous posts, I'm done at this point.

I meant, people who write with text language on SAID DOCUMENTS. I know I didn't specify that.

 

[Myxyzptlk]

I meant, people who write with text language on SAID DOCUMENTS. I know I didn't specify that.

Such as college essays? Only if they repeat the same mistake, once is probably just their brains clicking into overdrive.

 

[HowlingWoods]

I'm asking to have this thread closed before it gets too out of hand. I can already see drama brewing here, and the actual topic has been discussed as much as it can be. Any further discussion is simply beating a horse that is already dead.

 

[Myxyzptlk]

I'm asking to have this thread closed before it gets too out of hand. I can already see drama brewing here, and the actual topic has been discussed as much as it can be. Any further discussion is simply beating a horse that is already dead.

It wasn't meant to come off like that, we're simply sharing our opinions. I made my final points anyways take care.

 

[Captain Hesperus]

Thread closed.


Captain Hesperus