Lis Allison on wed 23 dec 09
On Wednesday 23 December 2009, David Hendley wrote:
> punctuation. Of course I would never use an "emoticon".
> Still, if it came down to a choice of having kids use stupid spellings
> and abbreviations or not writing at all, I think they, and we, are
> better off with the former.
One thing I kind of like about their communications is the creativity they
show in how they use language. I'm of course not exposed to a lot of it,
being an old fogey, but when I see some of my grandson's texts I'm
impressed by the fresh way he and his friends write.
I like their clothes too, at least how they put them together!
Cheers and Merry Merry,
Lis
--
Elisabeth Allison
Pine Ridge Studio
www.Pine-Ridge-Studio.blogspot.com
Taylor Hendrix on wed 23 dec 09
Dearest of Freds,
If you are just now becoming exposed to "mindless drivel" then you
haven't read much. Don't you remember newspapers?
Let's remember that communications ironic, Byronic, or emoticonic are
all skillful communications in their own way. List servers are not
the same thing as good old fashioned missive trading, nor are all
postings in clayart essay material. Let it be what it will be (messy)
and spontaneous and tidy and well thought out (not by me) and other
junk too. (I'm on fire here) :P
And I'm with George on the whole people-eating thing, yucky.
Taylor, in Rockport TX
wirerabbit1 on Skype (-0600 UTC)
http://wirerabbit.blogspot.com
http://wirerabbitpots.blogspot.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wirerabbit/
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 4:28 PM, Fred Parker wrote:
...=3DC2=3DA0I'm talking about sending emails to someone who is
> sitting four feet away. =3DC2=3DA0I'm talking about mindless postings on =
Face=3D
book
> announcing to the world that "I'm looking out the window now" and other s=
=3D
uch
> mindless drivel.
...
Fred Parker on wed 23 dec 09
Yep. Couldn't agree more, BUT...
Since the takeover of email as the communication venue du jour -- and the=
=3D
accompanying deterioration of personal communication skills -- I have
steadfastly refused to use "emoticons" or stupid sophomoric abbreviations=
=3D
to
convey emotion. I figure if someone can't decipher tone by reading, then=
=3D
either 1) I am a poor communicator or 2) they lack reading skills and
frankly I don't care which one it is.
I will NOT supply goofy little smiley/frowney faces or (even worse) writt=
=3D
en
clues, that are supposed to suggest I am "rolling on the floor laughing m=
=3D
y
ass off" and others equally junior high-schoolish that have made their wa=
=3D
y
into the accepted vernacular.
For all of its power, in my opinion (or for you smiley-facers out there,
"IMHO") email has diminished communication by reducing human interaction
while also reducing overall literacy. As our kids text and sext each oth=
=3D
er
instead of calling each other and making out or as we rely on email to ma=
=3D
ke
a simple request of the person in the next cubicle, Beavis and Butthead a=
=3D
re,
in fact, winning the battle. We see it on ClayArt when little squabbles
break out and we see it with friends who take something the wrong way and=
=3D
we
hear it everytime we check out at the grocery.
So, Dude, it's like we don't know how to talk to each other anymore,
y'knowwhuimsayin? Awesome, man!...=3D20
Merry Christmas, Dudes (I'm smiling:)
Fred Parker=3D20=3D20
On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 09:31:18 -0500, Carolyn Boeri =3D
ET>
wrote:
>Hi all,
>I wonder if anyone else has noticed that emailing and talking to someone=
=3D
in
>person is very different. When you have another person in front of you w=
=3D
ith
>blue, green gray, or pink eyes and a face, white, black, brown, yellow, =
=3D
tan
>or otherwise shaped somewhat similar to your own, looming large or
>short,breathing, frowning or smiling, grimacing, listening to you, does =
=3D
it
>not bring out a more human response or maybe temper the reaction?
David Hendley on wed 23 dec 09
I have to emphatically disagree with Fred's statement:
>For all of its power, in my opinion (or for you smiley-facers out there,
>"IMHO") email has diminished communication by reducing human interaction
>while also reducing overall literacy.
Speaking from my own personal experiences, e-mail has vastly
increased my communication and human interaction. It has greatly
improved my writing skills because the more you do something
the better you get at it.
Becoming involved with Clayart made me start writing again. Here I
was, in my 40's, when Clayart came along. In my past I had written my
way through school, college, and graduate school. I had written a thesis,
many songs, and several articles for Ceramics Monthly. But, with
life to live and a family to raise, I had pretty much quit writing.
Clayart, and e-mail, got me back in the routine. Within a few years
I had friends all over the world and 5 new articles published. Because
of the Internet, my reading in general increased, and because of the
ease of Wiki-Dictionary, I started a vocabulary list that is now up
to well over a hundred words, which I can now draw on for my
own writing.
I make an effort to keep my e-mail communication grammatical in
the strict sense of the word - proper spelling, capitalization, and
punctuation. Of course I would never use an "emoticon".
Still, if it came down to a choice of having kids use stupid spellings
and abbreviations or not writing at all, I think they, and we, are
better off with the former. At least they are actively writing.
David Hendley
david@farmpots.com
http://www.farmpots.com
Steven Walker on wed 23 dec 09
Unfortunately, Fred, we must take the bad with good. True, email, texting
and forum postings have diminished communication skills. True, email,
texting and forum postings have given people the boldness and crassness to
say things to people and in a way that they wouldn't dare do in a face to
face interaction. However, the Internet has also given us the ability to
connect with people across the country and the world, for that matter, like
never before. Twenty years ago, you would need to know people in your loca=
l
area to bounce ideas off about pottery. Now with the click of a mouse you
can bounce those ideas off of someone in Japan and down the street at the
same time. You just gotta take the good with the bad. And here it
come...wait...wait..... ; )
Walker
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 8:11 AM, Fred Parker wrote:
> Yep. Couldn't agree more, BUT...
>
> Since the takeover of email as the communication venue du jour -- and the
> accompanying deterioration of personal communication skills -- I have
> steadfastly refused to use "emoticons" or stupid sophomoric abbreviations
> to
> convey emotion. I figure if someone can't decipher tone by reading, then
> either 1) I am a poor communicator or 2) they lack reading skills and
> frankly I don't care which one it is.
>
> I will NOT supply goofy little smiley/frowney faces or (even worse) writt=
en
> clues, that are supposed to suggest I am "rolling on the floor laughing m=
y
> ass off" and others equally junior high-schoolish that have made their wa=
y
> into the accepted vernacular.
>
> For all of its power, in my opinion (or for you smiley-facers out there,
> "IMHO") email has diminished communication by reducing human interaction
> while also reducing overall literacy. As our kids text and sext each oth=
er
> instead of calling each other and making out or as we rely on email to ma=
ke
> a simple request of the person in the next cubicle, Beavis and Butthead
> are,
> in fact, winning the battle. We see it on ClayArt when little squabbles
> break out and we see it with friends who take something the wrong way and
> we
> hear it everytime we check out at the grocery.
>
> So, Dude, it's like we don't know how to talk to each other anymore,
> y'knowwhuimsayin? Awesome, man!...
>
> Merry Christmas, Dudes (I'm smiling:)
>
> Fred Parker
>
> On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 09:31:18 -0500, Carolyn Boeri <
> claychi_04@VERMONTEL.NET>
> wrote:
>
> >Hi all,
> >I wonder if anyone else has noticed that emailing and talking to someone
> in
> >person is very different. When you have another person in front of you
> with
> >blue, green gray, or pink eyes and a face, white, black, brown, yellow,
> tan
> >or otherwise shaped somewhat similar to your own, looming large or
> >short,breathing, frowning or smiling, grimacing, listening to you, does =
it
> >not bring out a more human response or maybe temper the reaction?
>
Vince Pitelka on wed 23 dec 09
Fred Parker wrote:
"Since the takeover of email as the communication venue du jour -- and the
accompanying deterioration of personal communication skills -- I have
steadfastly refused to use "emoticons" or stupid sophomoric abbreviations t=
o
convey emotion. I figure if someone can't decipher tone by reading, then
either 1) I am a poor communicator or 2) they lack reading skills and
frankly I don't care which one it is."
Hi Fred -
It is for good reason that this comes up periodically on Clayart. It does
become a challenge to effectively convey our message and frame of mind, but
as is the case in writing artist's statements, in email communication it is
critically important to write in one's own voice, genuinely saying whatever
it is we want to say. It is possible to do that in an honest and
straightforward manner so that no one will take offense unless they are
looking for a reason to do so, and I believe that emoticons and cute
abbreviations just hasten the deterioration of email communication. It is
the responsibility of the writer to not sound rude or angry unless it is
genuinely their intent to do so, and is the responsibility of the reader to
not assume anger or rudeness unless the writer has made clear their intent.
As compared to so many online discussion forums, Clayart is extremely civil=
,
so it is far less of a problem here. There are still many times when the
reader misunderstands the writer's intent. The general guideline that I
find most helpful is "If no offense was intended, then there is none." Whe=
n
reading a Clayart message where you are not sure about the writer's intent,
try to assume the best, and imagine the writer sitting across the table wit=
h
a beer or a cup of coffee (mode of dress is up to your imagination, of
course!). It is amazing how that can change the tone of the message. In
email we do not have vocal inflection, facial expression, or body language
to clarify intent and meaning. All we have is the written word, and when w=
e
read a post and allow our mind to incorrectly assign vocal inflection etc.,
we completely change the meaning, and that is not fair or productive for th=
e
reader or the writer.
It is easy to write in a civil fashion, and to assume civility in reading
Clayart posts. If everyone would commit to both, things would go even more
smoothly on Clayart.
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft
Tennessee Tech University
vpitelka@dtccom.net; wpitelka@tntech.edu
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka
Fred Parker on wed 23 dec 09
Jeeze... I'm not bad-mouthing the Internet! (How could I bad-mouth
something Al Gore came up with?!...) Nor am I saying email has done in
everybody who uses it (David), I'm simply bad-mouthing what email has don=
=3D
e
to a huge number of (I suspect mostly young) people who SHOULD be perfect=
=3D
ly
capable of communicating with peers, friends, associates, strangers and l=
=3D
aw
enforcement officers using basic English. And don't give me that crap ab=
=3D
out
"saving bandwidth" or "communication efficiency." Yeah, air traffic
controllers and rocket scientists need that but most of us don't! I'm
talking about using little phony pictures made out of punctuation marks -=
=3D
-
or maybe little yellow HTML smiley faces for those who don't care about
bandwidth -- to make up for one's inability to effectively convey a sense=
=3D
of
tone in communication. I'm talking about sending emails to someone who i=
=3D
s
sitting four feet away. I'm talking about mindless postings on Facebook
announcing to the world that "I'm looking out the window now" and other s=
=3D
uch
mindless drivel.
I'm sure David is a better writer now than earlier because David WANTED t=
=3D
o
be a better writer. It sure as hell wasn't because Al Gore gave him a to=
=3D
ol
to send smiley faces from his potter's wheel to his wife out in the back
yard feeding the dog.
Jeeze, guys. Read my posting --=3D20
Fred Parker
(who is currently searching for the "frustration" smiley face)
Jeanie Silver on wed 23 dec 09
Wonderful post, Fred...no one could call you a 'poor communicator'...
Jeanie in Pa., snug under 20" of snow....the first thing shoveled was the
path to the studio.
Terrance on thu 24 dec 09
Writing emails is one of the best methods that have come to mankind in or=
=3D
der=3D20
to communicate. We can write, amend, and check grammar, spelling and=3D20
vocabulary. The one thing that we tend to forget is to check the tone a=
=3D
nd=3D20
intent and the impact of our words on the person receiving the mail.
Once the send key is hit it is difficult to turn back time. Much like th=
=3D
e arrow=3D20
let fly.
I try to follow the advice of Omar.
The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ,=3D20
Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit=3D20
Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,=3D20
Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it.
Omar Khayyam
Terrance
Fred Parker on thu 24 dec 09
Well said, Vince. In certain situations it might be a bit harder to writ=
=3D
e
what one actually means instead of relying on abbreviations and symbols b=
=3D
ut
it is, in my opinion, well worth the effort.
Fred Parker
On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 16:09:05 -0600, Vince Pitelka w=
=3D
rote:
SNIP
>It is for good reason that this comes up periodically on Clayart. It do=
=3D
es
>become a challenge to effectively convey our message and frame of mind, =
=3D
but
>as is the case in writing artist's statements, in email communication it=
=3D
is
>critically important to write in one's own voice, genuinely saying whate=
=3D
ver
>it is we want to say. It is possible to do that in an honest and
>straightforward manner so that no one will take offense unless they are
>looking for a reason to do so, and I believe that emoticons and cute
>abbreviations just hasten the deterioration of email communication. It =
=3D
is
>the responsibility of the writer to not sound rude or angry unless it is=
=3D
>genuinely their intent to do so, and is the responsibility of the reader=
=3D
to
>not assume anger or rudeness unless the writer has made clear their inte=
=3D
nt.
SNIP
steve graber on thu 24 dec 09
=3D0A=3D0A=3D0Ai try to remember to KISS every thing i write.=3D0A=3D0AKeep=
It Simple=3D
Stupid!=3DA0 =3D0A=3D0A=3D0A=3D0A=3D0A=3D0A=3DA0Steve Graber, Graber's Pot=
tery, Inc=3D0AClar=3D
emont, California USA=3D0AThe Steve Tool - for awesome texture on pots! =3D=
0Aww=3D
w.graberspottery.com steve@graberspottery.com =3D0A=3D0A=3D0AOn Laguna Clay=
's web=3D
site=3D0Ahttp://www.lagunaclay.com/blogs/ =3D0A=3D0A=3D0A=3D0A----- Origina=
l Message =3D
----=3D0A> From: Terrance =3D0A> To: Clayart@LSV.CERAM=
ICS.=3D
ORG=3D0A> Sent: Thu, December 24, 2009 5:41:44 AM=3D0A> Subject: Re: emaili=
ng v=3D
ersus talking in person, Dudes=3D0A> =3D0A> Writing emails is one of the be=
st m=3D
ethods that have come to mankind in order =3D0A> to communicate.=3DA0 We ca=
n wr=3D
ite, amend, and check grammar, spelling and =3D0A> vocabulary.=3DA0 The one=
thi=3D
ng that we tend to forget is to check the tone and =3D0A> intent and the im=
pa=3D
ct of our words on the person receiving the mail.=3D0A> =3D0A> Once the sen=
d ke=3D
y is hit it is difficult to turn back time.=3DA0 Much like the arrow =3D0A>=
=3D0A=3D
> let fly.=3D0A> =3D0A> I try to follow the advice of Omar.=3D0A> =3D0A> =
=3D0A> The M=3D
oving Finger writes; and, having writ, =3D0A> Moves on: nor all thy Piety n=
or=3D
Wit =3D0A> Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line, =3D0A> Nor all thy Te=
ars =3D
wash out a Word of it.=3D0A> =3D0A> Omar Khayyam=3D0A> =3D0A> =3D0A> Terran=
ce=3D0A=3D0A=3D
=3D0A=3D0A
Kathy Forer on thu 24 dec 09
On Dec 24, 2009, at 12:21 AM, Taylor Hendrix wrote:
> Let's remember that communications ironic, Byronic, or emoticonic are
> all skillful communications in their own way. List servers are not
> the same thing as good old fashioned missive trading, nor are all
> postings in clayart essay material. Let it be what it will be (messy)
> and spontaneous and tidy and well thought out (not by me) and other
> junk too. (I'm on fire here) :P
Save the emoticon, or drop punctuation altogether!
Emoticons have a long history in publishing, teletype and computer =3D
shorthand. Computer techies first used them in the 1970s to simplify =3D
their pre-300 baud modem communication. They're not substitutes for =3D
words but enhancements and shorthand for classes of expression, like =3D
"tongue in cheek." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emoticon
They're also related to ascii art which is a creative way of making =3D
pictures with text only.=3D20
If words are misused and corrupted, don't blame a particular means of =3D
expression simply because it adds a little puckish humor. "The fault, =3D
dear Brutus, lies not in our stars, but in ourselves if we are =3D
underlings."
\(^_^)/
I have a slight peeve with systems that replace text emoticons with =3D
little graphic faces. Except for the basic smiley face, they're hard to =3D
read and add a layer of gratuitous prettification to what is basically a =
=3D
meaningful shorthand substitution.=3D20
Kathy
.--. /\
'--' /__\
| |
|
