abbreviation

Iway on'tday indmay allway ethay acronymway!!

OrisDay

On Sep 26, 9:32 pm, "Gary C" <f...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> "Peppermint Patty" <cinderella...m> wrote in message
>
> news:1190839671.737152.294970@22g2000hsm. ...
>
>
>
> > Just like the fact that > > they say "yunz" in Pittsburgh -- might not
> > make sense to outsiders, but
> >> > the
> >> > people there would know exactly what you're talking about.
>
> >> Just because THAT'S what they do, doesn't make it right.
>
> > Maybe not, but it's right for THEM. JM2CW.
>
> Uh-huh ... UPYA2

Okay...I figured out JM2C (not positive about the W), but can't find a
definition for UPYA2 anywhere... Help!!!

In article <hbudnWeHMOxcCGbbnZ2dnUVZ_j2dnZ2d@>,
"Gloria in Miami" <konslergm> wrote:

> You see, Ed, that's the big problem here. You come to RADP to read the
> messages. You don't like/understand some of the "shorthand," but instead of
> trying to learn what you need to know by (1) reading the list on All Ears
> Net or (2) assimilating the "definitions" people give you, you just say
> "...don't tell me I really don't need to become accustomed to it."
>
> So, what you're actually saying is that all of us RADPers should change the
> way we write our messages just so YOU (and maybe a few other resistant
> souls) can take advantage of the knowledge and tips we have to offer without
> any effort on your part at all.
>
> Sorry, but it's just not going to happen. When you go to a "foreign
> country," it's only courteous to learn a few words in the native language.
> Same goes for RADP and other internet communities. It's only courteous to
> learn a few words of the language ...or at least not to complain when you
> can't understand what the "natives" are saying, especially when they offer
> you the needed help.

Well said, Gloria!

I think the last line is key.

--
Sandi

In article <BNLKi.7385$1z3.7222@trndny02>, "Ed" <friday@fishinthe.net>
wrote:

> People here do it because it's cutesy, it's a RADP thing.

No, we do it because it is faster.

--
Sandi

"Jeffrey Gordon" <jeff@jeffreygordon.net> wrote

> Ed:
>
> The simple truth is that you're right and wrong at the same time.
>
> You're right that there is sometimes an overabundance of three-letter
> acronyms (TLAs) in this group. As a Disney fanatic, even *I* have
> trouble reading some of the trip reports because of the lack of words
> and the quantity of TLAs.
>
> If we want to grow our membership in RADP to even greater numbers, we
> will have to accommodate some amount of change in our behavior so as to
> not tick off potential new contributors.

I think that's what is happening. I also think that new visitors give up
rather than take the time to learn all of these acronyms.

> On the other hand, YOU are attempting to join an established community,

Stop right there. I visit this group when a trip to the parks is eminent.
Mainly to see what's new. I'm not looking to join a club. This is a public
message board with no log-in requirements and no moderator.

You can have a RADP club through Yahoo groups that requires log-in and is
moderated. I would not join it.

There are some very nice people here and some that I don't care two cents
about but that's normal.

"Lee" <leeschw@campmor.com> wrote

> The posters ARE the readers, and vice versa. Do you go to a foreign
> country expecting the natives to speak English to you.....

ugh, not again.

"Lee" <leeschw@campmor.com> wrote

> Thanks, Judy. . I wish I had read that thread before responding to
> Ed on this one. Wouldn't have wasted my "virtual breath" trying to
> offer reason to an unreasonable one. Ah, well. Moving on....
>
> Lee

What is so unreasonable about making things easy for everyone?

In article <teRKi.8008$ax2.5217@trndny08>, "Ed" <friday@fishinthe.net>
wrote:

> "Lee" <leeschw@campmor.com> wrote
>
> > Thanks, Judy. . I wish I had read that thread before responding to
> > Ed on this one. Wouldn't have wasted my "virtual breath" trying to
> > offer reason to an unreasonable one. Ah, well. Moving on....
> >
> > Lee
>
> What is so unreasonable about making things easy for everyone?

The same point I made before, and others have since, and you ignored:

When a math book is written it uses terms suitable to that forum.
When a TR is written for RADP it includes terms suitable for that forum.

An author does not write for the lowest common denominator, but for the
expected audience.

--
Sandi

"Ed" <friday@fishinthe.net> wrote in message
news:0dRKi.5925$X23.2672@trndny04...

> They do just that. This is a great group. The problem is that if you begin
> to read a post that's filled with acronyms and you don't know what most of
> them mean you have to ask. I have asked on several occasions and people
were
> great at answering. Meanwhile, the post that had you stumped is on hold or
> forgotten.

Maybe we're getting to the crux of the matter, Ed. In this group, and others
like it, there really are (at least) two different types of postings:

1 - requests for information, and direct answers

2 - discussions among the regulars

If someone comes here looking for information, often as not they will
*initiate* a discussion with a question - and, as you point out, they
usually get the information in a useful form.

But if they wade into the deeper waters, things are going to be different.
A newsgroup is not typically the type of place where you'll get questions
answered by browsing the existing content. Those types of posts are more
likely to include the specialized vocabulary. If those are the kinds of
posts they are interested in, they're likely to be the type of person who
will hang around and absorb the vocabulary by osmosis.

But most of the folks whose intent it is to come by the group, get a
particular piece of information, offer their thanks and move on aren't going
to be reading trip reports and Pop Warner discussions. This may be the
answer to your question "why not make it easier for everyone?" The type of
readers who don't have a clue about the acronyms are also the ones least
likely to read the posts that use them freely. So the utility of removing
acronyms from the "in-house discussions" may be small relative to the energy
consumed by said removal.

DJJ

"Darrell Jefress" <evely7@tokyo.com> wrote in message
news:u4SKi.606090$p47.477248@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> "Ed" <friday@fishinthe.net> wrote in message
> news:0dRKi.5925$X23.2672@trndny04...
>
>> They do just that. This is a great group. The problem is that if you
>> begin
>> to read a post that's filled with acronyms and you don't know what most
>> of
>> them mean you have to ask. I have asked on several occasions and people
> were
>> great at answering. Meanwhile, the post that had you stumped is on hold
>> or
>> forgotten.
>
> Maybe we're getting to the crux of the matter, Ed. In this group, and
> others
> like it, there really are (at least) two different types of postings:
>
> 1 - requests for information, and direct answers
>
> 2 - discussions among the regulars
>
> If someone comes here looking for information, often as not they will
> *initiate* a discussion with a question - and, as you point out, they
> usually get the information in a useful form.
>
> But if they wade into the deeper waters, things are going to be different.
> A newsgroup is not typically the type of place where you'll get questions
> answered by browsing the existing content. Those types of posts are more
> likely to include the specialized vocabulary. If those are the kinds of
> posts they are interested in, they're likely to be the type of person who
> will hang around and absorb the vocabulary by osmosis.
>
> But most of the folks whose intent it is to come by the group, get a
> particular piece of information, offer their thanks and move on aren't
> going
> to be reading trip reports and Pop Warner discussions. This may be the
> answer to your question "why not make it easier for everyone?" The type of
> readers who don't have a clue about the acronyms are also the ones least
> likely to read the posts that use them freely. So the utility of removing
> acronyms from the "in-house discussions" may be small relative to the
> energy
> consumed by said removal.
>
> DJJ

Thanks.