4 ms·

Ooh, this article lost me at the first sentence. (young'in, really?) Sadly for me, whatever wisdom it may have contained will have to remain a mystery.

yellowapple 6y ago
Sure is amazin' that y'all would write off a whole doggone article on one teensy weensy colloquialism of the 'merican workin' class, I reckon.
- gerbilly 6y ago
  I said the article lost me at the first sentence. It doesn't mean I stopped reading there. I still gave it a chance and read the next few paragraphs before finally giving up on it. I don't mind colloquialisms where they add to the depth of the content. The article in question, however, is written in a circumlocutory style that suggests more effort was put into the style than the substance. I admit that it's possible that the signal to noise ratio in the article is better than I assumed, but I don't have to subject myself to tedious writing when there is so much good stuff I could be reading instead.
  - yellowapple 6y ago
    It's telling a (what I assume to be) fictional story. It doesn't need to be some dry technical article just because it happens to have some Rust code in it. Like, if that ain't your thing, then so be it, but I think you're assigning values to it that simply don't apply. That is: if you were reading a novel or short story, would you have the same complaint?
    - gerbilly 6y ago
      Yes I would have the same complaint about the writing style.
      - yellowapple 6y ago
        How boring and bland. I mean, whatever floats your boat, but that complaint would apply to a significant majority (if not entirety) of well-renowned English literature. I have enough trouble sitting through a book as-is (I'm a slow reader, since I like to "hear" the narration and dialogue in my head); can't imagine how soul-sucking it'd be to sit through a book that just told everything matter-of-factly with no narration personality whatsoever. Like, the style's kinda the whole point. It's a key part of the artistic value of literature, and what makes literature entertaining (or at least moreso than reading a dictionary front to back).

yellowapple 6y ago

Sure is amazin' that y'all would write off a whole doggone article on one teensy weensy colloquialism of the 'merican workin' class, I reckon.

gerbilly 6y ago
I said the article lost me at the first sentence. It doesn't mean I stopped reading there. I still gave it a chance and read the next few paragraphs before finally giving up on it. I don't mind colloquialisms where they add to the depth of the content. The article in question, however, is written in a circumlocutory style that suggests more effort was put into the style than the substance. I admit that it's possible that the signal to noise ratio in the article is better than I assumed, but I don't have to subject myself to tedious writing when there is so much good stuff I could be reading instead.
- yellowapple 6y ago
  It's telling a (what I assume to be) fictional story. It doesn't need to be some dry technical article just because it happens to have some Rust code in it. Like, if that ain't your thing, then so be it, but I think you're assigning values to it that simply don't apply. That is: if you were reading a novel or short story, would you have the same complaint?
  - gerbilly 6y ago
    Yes I would have the same complaint about the writing style.
    - yellowapple 6y ago
      How boring and bland. I mean, whatever floats your boat, but that complaint would apply to a significant majority (if not entirety) of well-renowned English literature. I have enough trouble sitting through a book as-is (I'm a slow reader, since I like to "hear" the narration and dialogue in my head); can't imagine how soul-sucking it'd be to sit through a book that just told everything matter-of-factly with no narration personality whatsoever. Like, the style's kinda the whole point. It's a key part of the artistic value of literature, and what makes literature entertaining (or at least moreso than reading a dictionary front to back).