Political content doesn't mean political discussion

[kadioguy]

I take your point but the fastest way for us to get rid of potentially inflammatory content is simply to delete it. Yes, the mod could have taken the time to copy the contents of the post, save it, paste it into a PM and send it to you with an explanation, but we shouldn't really have to do that. If users simply avoided posting such content in the first place, we wouldn't need to do anything similar, nor would we need to be having this conversation!

That's true, but I really don't think that the content I quoted in my post was inflammatory. It was about "Your President will continue to put the People first". That was positive (no pun intended) and inspiring. Having read the rule in the general rules, before I had posted my post, I didn't think it violated the rule.

Plus, there's a first time for everything. This is the first time I have been in this situation. So I would wish that the moderator could have taken a little time to make a copy of the contents, and send it to me with an explanation. If this was the second time or more, then just delete my post. I wouldn't say a word.

 

[emsr2d2]

The reason I used "potentially inflammatory" was not because the content itself is politically touchy. It was because I have been on the forum long enough to see that almost any post with political content can cause a raft of responses that definitely aren't to do with language.

 

[tzfujimino]

Well, I'd like to see the post in question - the link provided by Rover doesn't work for me.

Tweeting, in my opinion, is like writing song lyrics - there should be some room for creativity. What we should discuss is not the grammaticality but interpretation(s) of the particular phrasing used there. However, during the course of the discussion, someone might question its quality and say it's plain wrong. It's quite possible the tweeter (Kayleigh McEnany, in this case) might take it as a defamatory/an inflammatory remark.

I need to see the post first, but I'm inclined to think that it was the right decision for a moderator to make.

The issue here is that we don't know her true intention.
:-(

 

[Rover_KE]

I do, but I'd PM the poster with a response. On reflection, that's what I should have done in the present case.

 

[Tarheel]

I'm not in favor of political commentary of any kind. One, there are places for that. Two, the discussion can quickly get out of hand.

(As it is some posters seem to assume that everybody agrees with their opinion.)

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

This is as good a place as any to answer the question. The author of the tweet doesn't know the rules of capitalization. He uses it to emphasize a word.

Exactly. Always remember that native English speakers often don't have flawless writing skills, spelling skills, or grammar.

That's why it's better to study writing that has been edited. Editors correct writers' mistakes.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

. . . Tweeting, in my opinion, is like writing song lyrics - there should be some room for creativity. . . .

The problem isn't creativity. The problem is that Kadio was trying to learn English from unedited writing. That's bound to lead to confusion.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

That's true, but I really don't think that the content I quoted in my post was inflammatory.

To many Americans, at least, it is. That was the moderator's concern.

It was about "Your President will continue to put the People first". That was positive (no pun intended) and inspiring.

Again, many Americans would disagree vehemently.

Having read the rule in the general rules, before I had posted my post, I didn't think it violated the rule.

I agree. You were just wondering about an incorrect capital letter. And you supplied enough of the quote to be sure we understood the context.

Plus, there's a first time for everything. This is the first time I have been in this situation.

Yes. You're blameless!

So I would wish that the moderator could have taken a little time to make a copy of the contents, and send it to me with an explanation.

That's a reasonable suggestion. I don't know whether our moderators have time to deal with queries that way. They can answer that.

If this was the second time or more, then just delete my post. I wouldn't say a word.

Kadio, your written English continues to improve! At this point, it's better than most native English speakers'.

 

[tzfujimino]

The problem isn't creativity. The problem is that Kadio was trying to learn English from unedited writing. That's bound to lead to confusion.

Well, I think her way of using the phrase "the People" is creative in the sense that people don't normally write it that way.

I'd like to ask you a question, Charlie.
Please imagine that you're typing some English sentences on your computer/phone. You come to a point where you need to type the word 'people'.

Do/Can you capitalize it unconsciously?
Do/Can you do it without any intention?

 

[GoesStation]

Please imagine that you're typing some English sentences on your computer/phone. You come to a point where you need to type the word 'people'.

Do/Can you capitalize it unconsciously? Sure. Everyone makes a mistake from time to time. That kind is called a "typo", which is short for "typographical error".
Do/Can you do it without any intention?

Yes. See above.

 

[tzfujimino]

OK.

I thought we'd need to make a conscious effort to capitalize a word on a computer/phone. I suspected she had used it intentionally to convey her message effectively.

I was wrong.
Sorry.

 

[emsr2d2]

OK.

I thought we'd need to make a conscious effort to capitalize a word on a computer/phone. I suspected she had used it intentionally to convey her message effectively.

I was wrong.
Sorry.

I still think she did it on purpose, to emulate the way that Trump (incorrectly) capitalises certain words.

 

[GoesStation]

Trump isn't alone in using capitalization that way, and he didn't originate the practice. I'm sure his use of it has significantly increased its use in the general population. It's probably become a marker of the writer's political views: Trump opponents are sure to shun it for fear of looking like Trump.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

Well, I think her way of using the phrase "the People" is creative in the sense that people don't normally write it that way.

Only if you call all mistakes creative.

I'd like to ask you a question, Charlie.
Please imagine that you're typing some English sentences on your computer/phone. You come to a point where you need to type the word 'people'.

Do/Can you capitalize it unconsciously?

Not so far! (And I learned to type over fifty years ago.)

Do/Can you do it without any intention?

Of course not, for the same reason: It's hard to accidentally hold down the shift key while typing a letter.

I capitalize the first letter of every sentence, the first letter of each word in a proper noun, and most acronyms.

And like lots of people, I do make all kinds of mistakes. But I don't call it creativity!

 

[jutfrank]

I thought we'd need to make a conscious effort to capitalize a word on a computer/phone. I suspected she had used it intentionally to convey her message effectively.

Yes, I find it hard to imagine that wasn't intentional. I think it's just part of her rhetoric. I think it's reasonable to call that creativity.

Interestingly, I've just discovered that The Independent has quoted the Tweet without the capitalised 'P'. I'm now wondering whether that was a mistake.

Without particularly wanting to stray back into the discussion of what constitutes inflammatory content, I'll point out that this comment was made by the Press Secretary of the President of the United States. I can't imagine how a comment could possibly be any less inflammatory! I mean, what the hell else do people expect her to say? What am I missing here?

 

[GoesStation]

Without particularly wanting to stray back into the discussion of what constitutes inflammatory content, I'll point out that this comment was made by the Press Secretary of the President of the United States. I can't imagine how a comment could possibly be any less inflammatory! I mean, what the hell else do people expect her to say? What am I missing here?

The press secretary has very recently been widely ridiculed by people who don't support the president for thinking that someone who graduated from a small, obscure institution called Rhodes College was, perforce, a Rhodes scholar. Asking a question about the English in a tweet about that gaffe would lead to something similar to the deleted post.

 

[kadioguy]

The press secretary has very recently been widely ridiculed by people who don't support the president for thinking that someone who graduated from a small, obscure institution called Rhodes College was, perforce, a Rhodes scholar. Asking a question about the English in a tweet about that gaffe would lead to something similar to the deleted post.

If someone had ridiculed the secretary in their reply, then the post which should have been deleted by a moderator was theirs, not mine! I didn't ridicule anyone!

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

Yes, I find it hard to imagine that wasn't intentional. I think it's just part of her rhetoric. I think it's reasonable to call that creativity.

Good thought. I hadn't looked at it that way.

Interestingly, I've just discovered that The Independent has quoted the Tweet without the capitalised 'P'. I'm now wondering whether that was a mistake.

It was probably a kindness.

. . . What am I missing here?

That's where the political argument would start — the one the original thread was deleted to avoid.

Now excuse me while I go bite my tongue.

Off.

 

[kadioguy]

That's where the political argument would start — the one the original thread was deleted to avoid.

If so, the moderator should delete the particular, political argument post, rather than the whole thread. A thread can be used for future references once the question in it gets solved. Simply closing the thread would be another choice.

 

[jutfrank]

Asking a question about the English in a tweet about that gaffe would lead to something similar to the deleted post.

Exactly. This is the objection that I have—the fact that a question about the use of English in a comment about a comment that many people think was ridiculous may be deemed inappropriate for the forum, based only on the grounds that it could impel members to stray from the point into political discourse.

To state my point again—it's political discourse that should be avoided on the forum, not discussion of political discourse.