New Stories & Ideas

[Torg]

Izanagi:

The first one was the one I thought was wrong. But I might be wrong. I'm not perfect.

 

[YnemE]

Oh, there is a way to work this all out. Create a new user on CHYOO that has nothing to do with the TJChurch name. Add threads and create stories, but stop using ampersand and numerals the way you have.

How about you suggest I create a new account? Then, when I have done that, & attempt to Login with it, I learned it's been banished as well.

Out of E-mail addresses, & I'm not going to create one solely b/c you feel like making suggestions & then attacking me when I follow them.

 

[Torg]

Torg I'd also be more than happy to take a few, on the sole condition I finally get a response to this post:



I don't care if it was the "[sic]" or not, I just want to eradicate the doubt in my mind.

I think I did this, but it wasn't the [sic]. It was the first one with a few "Walk" "don't Walk" signs. I could be wrong.

 

[Torg]

How about you suggest I create a new account? Then, when I have done that, & attempt to Login with it, I learned it's been banished as well.

Out of E-mail addresses, & I'm not going to create one solely b/c you feel like making suggestions & then attacking me when I follow them.

You are right. I should have been more clear.

What I meant was for you to create a user ID that no one knew was you. That means don't use it to post on this forum, or at least, not in relation to the TJChurch issue, and also not identifying that it's TJChurch writing. Make your threads on CHYOO so we can't discover who it is, by using 'and' and 'one', etc.

Then I'd have no reason to banish the user.

 

[YnemE]

You are right. I should have been more clear.

What I meant was for you to create a user ID that no one knew was you. That means don't use it to post on this forum, or at least, not in relation to the TJChurch issue, and also not identifying that it's TJChurch writing. Make your threads on CHYOO so we can't discover who it is, by using 'and' and 'one', etc.

Then I'd have no reason to banish the user.

Well,

1] As I said, I'm out of E-mail addresses, or I might.

2] As it seems much of that Feedback you claimed to have been me wasn't, etc., you really had no reason to ban TJChurch from here, & you certainly had no reason to ban any of my names from CHYOO, so like I'd really trust you'd allow any name I created to go on simply b/c you lacked reason to toss them?

 

[BenjiDude]

It's like beating a dead horse...

2] As it seems much of that Feedback you claimed to have been me wasn't, etc., you really had no reason to ban TJChurch from here, & you certainly had no reason to ban any of my names from CHYOO, so like I'd really trust you'd allow any name I created to go on simply b/c you lacked reason to toss them?

That's generally why rules are put in place. It's really quite simple, follow the rules, don't get banned, brake the rules, get banned. What's so hard to understand?

Or I could go back & find posts where you wrote in Chinese. What?! I couldn't?! You didn't?! Nor did I do what you claim I did.

Except for the small matter that although not in so many (or so few) words you have on a number of occasions said that your grammar is infallible.

Also, I am sure the posts you are referring to are by people who would use the former one time & the latter another. So I really don't think you can speak on popularity when the person whose work you are going by would use either.

Sorry, didn't realise you could read minds. But for the sake of argument, the examples I'm using in my argument are people who have time and again used the same examples, I can't think of any of the regular contributors on chyoo who swap between using, "&" and, "and" namely because 99.9% of the regular uses on chyoo now which one is the right one to use in creative writing and so use, "and" instead of, "&".

True, but when he admits I made a good point in the same post where he goes on to attack me (in some cases fr things he claims I said or did that I didn't actually), I'd say that's about as close as you can get to "flip-flopping".

So what? The man can't talk about two different items in the same post? Get over yourself man, if indeed you are actually a man and not a whiny little child.

Not true; I sent them corrected where he was right, but as written above, he would tell me I was wrong any time I used the numbers/ampersands

That's because in creative writing you don't fucking use, "&" and numbers. Get it into your thick skull, for fuck sake. Your as stubborn and bolshy as my gran, at least she knows when it's time to move on though.

The sites would prove him right in some cases, wrong in others, & he refused to admit this.

As do you.

 

[YnemE]

That's generally why rules are put in place. It's really quite simple, follow the rules, don't get banned, brake the rules, get banned. What's so hard to understand?

Except for the fact that I broke no rules, & the feedbacks he claims (in this thread, I believe) were from me weren't? Nothing. But since I broke no rules, by your own words, I earned no banning.

Except for the small matter that although not in so many (or so few) words you have on a number of occasions said that your grammar is infallible.

I've said good, & probably better than average, but perfect? Never.

Sorry, didn't realise you could read minds. But for the sake of argument, the examples I'm using in my argument are people who have time and again used the same examples, I can't think of any of the regular contributors on chyoo who swap between using, "&" and, "and" namely because 99.9% of the regular uses on chyoo now which one is the right one to use in creative writing and so use, "and" instead of, "&".

Didn't realize you could read minds & see what people do or don't "now". But anyway, there are situations where each is correct, & while they might use a certain word/number in a situation where I didn't, they probably write different situations, & so use different words/numbers each time as the situation requests.

So what? The man can't talk about two different items in the same post? Get over yourself man, if indeed you are actually a man and not a whiny little child.

I'm certainly a man... Which is perhaps part of the reason why I would have both good & bad things to say about people but, when attacking.banning them, etc., I would stay on-point & on-topic, & save the others for another time (if ever).

That's because in creative writing you don't fucking use, "&" and numbers. Get it into your thick skull, for fuck sake. Your as stubborn and bolshy as my gran, at least she knows when it's time to move on though.

Even Torg would admit there are some cases where "&" is OK to use. I'm glad your gran knows when to move on... But maybe you should move her on to another discussion, lest you simply want to admit you as well have problems staying on-topic.

As do you.

No, I don't... I admit when I'm wrong. In conversations with 24ward, I would send him the same links he sent me, pointing-out where he was often right but just-as-often wrong, & he'd claim that sending me proof he'd been right made him right in all cases.

 

[BenjiDude]

Except for the fact that I broke no rules, & the feedbacks he claims (in this thread, I believe) were from me weren't? Nothing. But since I broke no rules, by your own words, I earned no banning.

You evidently did something somewhere along the line to get banned, people don't get banned for no reason.

I've said good, & probably better than average, but perfect? Never.

Except you have, by saying you have always been right (which you've said early on in this topic) implies that you are more or less perfect, does it not?

Didn't realize you could read minds & see what people do or don't "now". But anyway, there are situations where each is correct, & while they might use a certain word/number in a situation where I didn't, they probably write different situations, & so use different words/numbers each time as the situation requests.

Are you really going to be that anal and pick arguments with typo's? Especially with a man who has already said on more than one occasion in this thread that he's dyslexic and prone to such mistakes? I pitty you, I really do. Read the work of the popular/productive contributors, you'll find that they're pretty consistent with their use.

I'm certainly a man... Which is perhaps part of the reason why I would have both good & bad things to say about people but, when attacking.banning them, etc., I would stay on-point & on-topic, & save the others for another time (if ever).

Are you a politician? Because you've written a fair ol' amount there and said bugger all.

Even Torg would admit there are some cases where "&" is OK to use. I'm glad your gran knows when to move on... But maybe you should move her on to another discussion, lest you simply want to admit you as well have problems staying on-topic.

I'm not saying there aren't times when using, "&" is ok but creative writing isn't one of them, you only have to look at published books to realise that. You have looked at published books right?

No, I don't... I admit when I'm wrong. In conversations with 24ward, I would send him the same links he sent me, pointing-out where he was often right but just-as-often wrong, & he'd claim that sending me proof he'd been right made him right in all cases.

Which is what you've done, and continue to do. We've all cited numerous examples of things that have proven you wrong, we've pointed out popular usage, we've pointed out commercial examples. Yet you refuse to see the light, you refuse to yield to what is staring you in the face, you've dug yourself a hole (one which needs a ladder to get out of) and you've got too big an ego to back down and walk away. You could save yourself so much hassle and aggravation by just walking away, or saying, "Yeah ok, you win, I give up". What do you really lose? You'll still have your self belief, you'll still have your superiority complex, you'll still be able to keep writing the way you want (just maybe not on chyoo, maybe even still on chyoo if you make an alias and keep it to yourself).

Just walk away man. None of use are going to give you a second thought if you do walk away from all this.

 

[MistreatEd]

I'm a troll.

 

[BenjiDude]

There's (& was) a first time for everything.

I wholeheartedly dispute that. Nothing in life or the universe happens for no reasons, there is always something that quantifies and/or justifies an event happening.

You wouldn't have to ask that question if you understood everything you read exactly right...

Have you not misread something on occasion?

And the fact that you think I said that proves that was a problem with whatever writings of mine you felt said that.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out what you've been saying. You're very black and white in your arguments.

I agree on "pretty consistent", but again, that's not always, which is what you appear to have been claiming earlier.

I've not said always. Now who's having problems with what's being said?

Maybe to you. But we've already proven there are occasions where ou read what I write & misunderstand, if you understand at all.

I'll admit that there are times when I misread or misinterpret what has been written, I'm only human and prone to mistakes, these factors are compounded by being dyslexic.

Most certainly. But I'd say (& have before) that there is a fair difference between online-only "creative writing" & the published-on -paper word all readers pay for... Not to mention that there are times in "creative writing" & published writing when "&" is allowed, & even perhaps the better way. I also believe Torg would say this. (How great would it be if you & Torg could agree on that?)

Yeah there are times when it's allowed but you use it like it's going out of fashion, typically the phrase, "times" (as used in this instances) generally means, "on occasion" or, "infrequent" not every single time, which is what you do. Every time you write, "and" you use the ampersand, every time, that's not using it, "at times" is it?

Not true.

Brilliant, well rounded argument there, care to elaborate on it in anyway, size, shape, or form?

Again untrue; If you look at what I've said & see what it honestly means, you'll see I've admitted to making mistakes. But being right some, & even the majority of, times does not make you right in all cases.

I'm the last person to say I never make mistakes, hell I've already said that earlier in this very post, but you haven't and you keep falling on this same argument. You've made mistakes, but you don't admit to them and you don't accept that the way you've been writing (in regards to the constant use of, "&") is wrong.

Everyone should believe in themselves about something.

There's having self belief then there's just not seeing ones own short comings.

"still" implies I ever had one before.

I think this whole thread speaks for its self.

I did that before. Torg apparently found it out, & tossed me, to the point I have run out of E-mail addresses I could attach with a name.)

Could that have something to do with constantly coming back in here and continuing the argument? Even a wounded creature knows when to give up and lick it's wounds.

I didn't expect you to; Even a first thought (a correct one, anyway, as it appears you misread/misunderstand some of what I write) would be expecting too much.

I think you'll find that it would be a second thought, as we've all had the first one by reading this thread and responding to your posts.

 

[MistreatEd]

I'm a troll.

 

[BenjiDude]

Do you believe in Santa too? I used to believe it all happens for a reason, but maybe this is the first time that leads me to know that to not be the case.

No I don't believe in Santa. Give me one good example (not counting you being banned from here) of something happening for no reason.

Certainly; What I don't do is then take that thing I misread, & use it the way I thought it was meant as a definite fact of what the writer said/meant.

But until someone points out what you've read has been misinterpreted, how do you know you've misinterpreted it?

It may not take a genius, but it apparently takes someone other/different than you.

I've only been reading what you've typed, so I'll refer you to my above comment.

I have no problem with what's being said, but perhaps misunderstood the way you said it. You, on the other hand, have mistook me to mean something I never said.

Perhaps then there is something wrong with your writing style, if it can not be easily understood by all of your audience.

Yeah, & I've skinned my knee & broken my jaw a few times, but neither of those change how I read or understand things. (Where's that "world's smallest violin" when I need it?)

What's your point?

No it is not.

No it is not what? Purple? A turtle? If you're going to denounce something at least state what it is you're denouncing.

No, but as you appear to be overstating the amount of times I do it, much the way you have been understating how often others on CHYOO use it.

I do not believe I have in either case. I've only been going on what you've said has happened and what others have said has happened, by which I think my previous comments are perfectly valid.

Read what you yourself wrote, which I then quoted & responded to by saying it wasn't true, & know/admit that it isn't. If you fail to understand that, your problems have nothing to do with me.

I provided a statement, describing your actions. You just denied it with no explanation.

I admitted to making mistakes (even admitted to it in the sentences you quoted before writing this). So to say I haven't is absolutely false.

I've yet to see you say you were wrong, so far you've said, "there are examples in 'this' rule that justify my actions just like there are examples in 'this' rule that counter my actions". At no point have you out and out said, "I was wrong" or, "I made a mistake", you talk about admitting to making mistakes but as yet you have not actually come forward and said you made a mistake.

And then there's just boldfaced lying & understanding what someone says but denying it b/c it doesn't fit your own aims/devices.

When have I done that?

I am su re that it does. (I can se parate words, too.)

That's just childish.

And a writer of the level you claim to be knows when to use or not use certain punc'tuation. (Did it become an accent mark?)

And what level of writer am I claiming to be? I just do this (writing stories, not arguing with you) for fun, I have no intentions of making any money out of this passing hobby. I get the impression that your aims and goals go somewhat further than mine in regards to creative writing.

I would think it might be even a later thought than that in the sequence, as you'd first have enough to read & comprehend what I say.

Turn of phrase, one of those things that not meant to be taken at face value... get over yourself man. I'm done, there's no reasoning with someone who can't see past their own nose.

 

[MistreatEd]

I'm a troll.

 

[mememe621]

Izanagi:

The first one was the one I thought was wrong. But I might be wrong. I'm not perfect.

I also thought the first example was wrong when I read it. I don't believe you should use any commas in that sentence. (Do I need to clarify what I mean by "should"?)

 

[Izanagi]

I think I did this, but it wasn't the [sic]. It was the first one with a few "Walk" "don't Walk" signs. I could be wrong.

Indeed, however you did so after I posted the post you quoted in your post, therefore, I didn't have the knowledge yet. You only needed to answer once, sorry about being a bit bitchy, but I wanted the learning experience. Now,

I also thought the first example was wrong when I read it. I don't believe you should use any commas in that sentence. (Do I need to clarify what I mean by "should"?)

if one of you would be nice enough to give me a source for your beliefs, as mine doesn't have an answer for this question and doesn't accept questions on the material, we can all go home happy. In all probability you're both right, but when concrete sources are out there somewhere I prefer them over the odds.

 

[whizzper]

This is a great thread. To a point, anyway. I had to take TJ off my ignore list to read it, and it was worth it. Hey, I'll take "Walk This Way", if only to correct the thread that moron destroyed with his inane uses of numerals, and ampersands.

I'd always wondered if there were two TJChurch's. One that used the & and numerals, and another that actually knew proper grammar rules. Now it makes sense. He was edited by Switch76 and Torg.

Anyway, goodbye TJ, please let the door hit you on the way out.

 

[Torg]

Hey, I'll take "Walk This Way", if only to correct the thread that moron destroyed with his inane uses of numerals, and ampersands.

Thanks. It's yours.

 

[MistreatEd]

I'm a troll.

 

[mememe621]

Now, if one of you would be nice enough to give me a source for your beliefs, as mine doesn't have an answer for this question and doesn't accept questions on the material, we can all go home happy. In all probability you're both right, but when concrete sources are out there somewhere I prefer them over the odds.

So your sample sentence was: The sign changed from "Walk," to "Don't Walk," to "Walk" again within 30 seconds.'

Commas are used in the middle of a sentence to set off something that isn't essential to the meaning of that sentence. But in this case the sentence doesn't make any sense without that middle part--you need to first know the sign changed to say that it changed back.

Check out this list of rules for comma usage: http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/607/02/ especially rules 3-4. Also see rule 2 in the Unnecessary Commas section here: http://www.northland.cc.mn.us/owl/comma_rules.htm

Unless I'm missing something, there should not be commas in that sample sentence.

 

[Torg]

So your sample sentence was: The sign changed from "Walk," to "Don't Walk," to "Walk" again within 30 seconds.'

Commas are used in the middle of a sentence to set off something that isn't essential to the meaning of that sentence. But in this case the sentence doesn't make any sense without that middle part--you need to first know the sign changed to say that it changed back.

Check out this list of rules for comma usage: http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/607/02/ especially rules 3-4. Also see rule 2 in the Unnecessary Commas section here: http://www.northland.cc.mn.us/owl/comma_rules.htm

Unless I'm missing something, there should not be commas in that sample sentence.

Exactly. Rewrite the sentence without quotes: The sign changed from red to green to red again within 30 seconds. I wouldn't write, "The sign changed from red, to green, to red again within 30 seconds."

 

[Izanagi]

So your sample sentence was: The sign changed from "Walk," to "Don't Walk," to "Walk" again within 30 seconds.'

Commas are used in the middle of a sentence to set off something that isn't essential to the meaning of that sentence. But in this case the sentence doesn't make any sense without that middle part--you need to first know the sign changed to say that it changed back.

Check out this list of rules for comma usage: http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/607/02/ especially rules 3-4. Also see rule 2 in the Unnecessary Commas section here: http://www.northland.cc.mn.us/owl/comma_rules.htm

Unless I'm missing something, there should not be commas in that sample sentence.

Exactly. Rewrite the sentence without quotes: The sign changed from red to green to red again within 30 seconds. I wouldn't write, "The sign changed from red, to green, to red again within 30 seconds."

Doesn't my sample sentence technically belong to example 10 from your sample source?

10. Use a comma to shift between the main discourse and a quotation.

John said without emotion, "I'll see you tomorrow."

"I was able," she answered, "to complete the assignment."

In 1848, Marx wrote, "Workers of the world, unite!"

The commas aren't seperating an essential element from the rest of the sentence, it's shifting between the quote, which are being used to point out what the sign says. Think about it broken up like this:

The sign said, "Walk."
The sign changed to say, "Don't walk."
The sign changed to say, "Walk," again.

Thinking like that, I think it's actually missing commas. I still may be wrong, but the main point I'm trying to make is this isn't a comma rule, it's a quotation marks rule which happens to involved commas. You only gave me comma rules, so I'm still uncertain on this situation.

I will say, though, that I'm certainly thinking of going back to school now just so I can learn some of these rules first hand from someone who will actually let me ask questions.

 

[BenjiDude]

Begging your pardon guys, but could this discussion not be done in private messages? This thread has gone off topic enough as it is.

 

[mememe621]

Doesn't my sample sentence technically belong to example 10 from your sample source?



The commas aren't seperating an essential element from the rest of the sentence, it's shifting between the quote, which are being used to point out what the sign says. Think about it broken up like this:

The sign said, "Walk."
The sign changed to say, "Don't walk."
The sign changed to say, "Walk," again.

Thinking like that, I think it's actually missing commas. I still may be wrong, but the main point I'm trying to make is this isn't a comma rule, it's a quotation marks rule which happens to involved commas. You only gave me comma rules, so I'm still uncertain on this situation.

I will say, though, that I'm certainly thinking of going back to school now just so I can learn some of these rules first hand from someone who will actually let me ask questions.

Well, if you were trying to write the sentence that way you'd need to switch it from

The sign changed from "Walk," to "Don't Walk," to "Walk" again within 30 seconds.'
to
The sign changed from, "Walk," to, "Don't Walk," to, "Walk," again within 30 seconds.'

That many commas looks ridiculous so I'd have trouble believing it could be correct. But more importantly, no one is speaking in this sentence, not even the sign. This isn't dialogue, it's just a description of the sign, just like "The sign changed from red to green" in Torg's example.


If we're trying to justify the commas, what if we said there's a list of 3 things in the sentence that should be separated by commas?

 

[mememe621]

Begging your pardon guys, but could this discussion not be done in private messages? This thread has gone off topic enough as it is.

But then how could other people chime in?

I think we can probably wrap this thread up. It's been a great moment in CHYOO history already.

 

[Izanagi]

Begging your pardon guys, but could this discussion not be done in private messages? This thread has gone off topic enough as it is.

While it's true the thread is already off topic, with TJChurch no more than an annoying user here on the forums, this topic has no real purpose beyond entertaining everyone. As such, let's at least make it productive, and we did talk about grammar after TJChurch pulled it off topic. I mentioned that with grammar and it's thousands of different rules and exceptions, a pooling of minds is a better idea, and the minds can't exactly pool if we lock some of them out.

Well, if you were trying to write the sentence that way you'd need to switch it from

The sign changed from "Walk," to "Don't Walk," to "Walk" again within 30 seconds.'
to
The sign changed from, "Walk," to, "Don't Walk," to, "Walk," again within 30 seconds.'

That many commas looks ridiculous so I'd have trouble believing it could be correct. But more importantly, no one is speaking in this sentence, not even the sign. This isn't dialogue, it's just a description of the sign, just like "The sign changed from red to green" in Torg's example.


If we're trying to justify the commas, what if we said there's a list of 3 things in the sentence that should be separated by commas?

Well, I decided against that defense because a comma doesn't seem justified in a "from ___ to ___" circumstance, and, if I'm right about that, I don't see why it'd be justified in a "from ___ to ___ to ___" circumstance. However, if I'm wrong in circumstance one, then it seems I have my defense.

"It looks ridiculous, therefore, probably isn't be correct." I'm reminded of something Shinichi Kudo once said, "Don't be tricked with what you see now..sometimes the most unimaginable thing..is the truth!" I'm still not sure if this is one of those circumstances, but you see my point.

Finally, the signs have words on them and the sentence is about what the words read as, and the sign also tells the person/people reading it what to do; that's dialogue, and justifies quotes. Yes, it's an inanimate object, but it's still barking orders.