I Pit ILMVI for Complaining Incessantly About Acronyms

In a thread where my user name has been used so often there is no reason to type the full thing out every time. Shortening it to the initials is precisely how initialisms should be used. Your not-quite-irony becomes ironic. And you know what that is? Yeah. Cubed, it looks like.

There’s a problem y’all have here. A majority of posters agree with me that it’s not a good idea to use terms that your reader probably doesn’t know or understand. This is evident in the earlier parts of this thread where people wondered what the OP was on about; why was I being pitted for upholding best practices?

Similarly, why does the SDMB have a rule against using foreign language? That’s right–it’s the same thing. Don’t use writing that can not be expected to be understood by the average SDMB reader.

Later in the thread, as is standard for almost any Pit thread, the insults became directed at the so-called sinner, not the so-called sin. Having to face the reality of how off-base the OP was brought out a “interesting” scramble for flingable shit. Something–anything! Hurry!

I, of course, can’t win now, Once one lemming starts walking toward that cliff, the rest won’t be able to stop themselves. The parallels with MAGA America are evident. This which will cause even more tears and bed-wetting, and more fear of bucking the trend.

We can therefore expect even more praising of a bad habit that most here don’t even agree with. The bulk of you, if forced to be honest, agree with how I–as well as any decent writer, editor, or stylebook believe that writing should be made more accessible, not less. Better to fight ignorance than to spread it.

I absolutely expect you to continue praising your bad habit of interjecting your fussy corrections of folks’ posting habits in places where nobody wants you to do so, so yeah, I’m down with this prediction.

If I hire you as my editor, please correct me when I post confusingly. Otherwise, go to hell.

Many aardvarks get angina?
Moldy apple grout applications?
Most aristocrats grow avacados?
My arms grew arms?

Good choices for secure passphrases!

BRB, I gotta go do something…

I assume you are Burning Ribs Badly, and need to take them off the grill?

He’s obviously Branding Rye Bagels.

Too long, didn’t read… err, I mean TL, DR!

This is the new version of Godwinizing a thread.

It’s entirely possible to agree that undefined acronyms are a bad idea, and still think you’re a crazy asshole based on the way you carry on about it.

That’s the relevant Miss Manners principle right there.

If I am using an obscure acronym, I’ll explain what it is. Or I won’t use the acronym at all, unless it’s a long term that I don’t want to type out multiple times in full. I am in IT (that means Information Technology :stuck_out_tongue:) and I am used to communicating regularly with non-technical people. I try to explain things in plain language, and using jargon and acronyms is counter-productive to what I’m doing. So I understand the need to communicate clearly with people. I’m not going to impress anyone by using what sounds like nonsense.

But, if there is a common acronym, I’m not going to bother explaining it. I don’t need to explain what IMHO or TLDR mean. And if I’m in a technical thread, I’m going to use technical speech, the same way I do at work when I am chatting with other tech folks. If someone is talking about troubleshooting system crashes and is trying a variety of hardware and software solutions, I’m not going to explain every single term I’m using. They know what I’m saying or they wouldn’t be doing that in the first place.

Similarly, if I see a thread where people are using language I don’t understand (someone used the example of pilots talking about flight jargon, which is perfect) then I know it’s not a thread for me. I’m not going to insert myself into the thread and angrily demand that everyone explain themselves clearly. Fuck that, they are pilots, I’m not, I will stay in my lane like any sane adult would.

@I_Love_Me_Vol.I acronyms are words, they are part of a vocabulary. Just like any vocabulary, you shouldn’t demand that people speak in simple words you understand. Educate yourself. Look it up. If you don’t know what the word “parsimonious” means in a discussion about budgets, you wouldn’t demand a definition, would you? I would hope you’d just Google it, and find out it’s a way to say “penny-pinching”. And now you’ve expanded your own vocabulary.

And this is the point where @I_Love_Me_Vol.I 's junior-modding assholery turned the tide of sentiment so firmly against him in this thread. He imagines himself the arbiter of the type of thread that is acceptable in SDMB, and deems any kind of higher-level technical thread that might involve jargon unfamiliar to him out of bounds…

…whereas @I_Love_Me_Vol.I demands the right to insert a disruptive toddler tantrum whenever other people are having a technical discussion that includes jargon terminology unfamiliar to him, even when he has no interest in the content of the thread.

No, @I_Love_Me_Vol.I, you are not being persecuted because of some incoherent social theory about MAGA culture. You are making yourself unpopular by persisting in being a pompous annoying asshole about acronyms. Fuck off.

THANK YOU! We need a national medal of honor for people who are concerned about other people and make sure they understand.

I’m so tired of feeling stupid, not knowing what a poster is talking about, and then googling their acronyms and getting dozens of possible decodings, and feeling even more stupid.

.

Oh, and your take on vocabulary hits home as well. We have a friend who tries to use the most intellectual word he can find. We laugh amongst ourselves that we can see him mentally going through his Advanced Thesaurus, honing his one sentence comment to be as obscure as possible. And it’ll probably segue into a quote from some 18th century literature we’ve never heard of.

And this is sitting around a bar on a Friday night! When all of us are done thinking for the day.

.

Edited To Add :-} Oh, just remembered that he’ll take an obscure acronym and pronounce it as a word, in a non-standard way. I remember him referring to a Meery… that time we asked Whaaa…?
“A Meery… I’m surprised you don’t know what an MRI is. They slide you into a machine that uses…”

That feller sounds like an excellent candidate for ex-friend status.

It is the case that the SDMB has a lot of experts in a lot of disparate fields. And many fields have many acronyms, initialisms, and plain old words that are still used in a specific jargon sense, not their main Merriam-Webster sense. IT hash is not interchangeable with kitchen hash. The law and philosophy are both famous for using ordinary words in highly technical senses much at odds with common usage.

And because we have so many people of disparate backgrounds, a thread on e.g. airplanes, or IT, or law, or medicine, or plumbing, or knitting* or, … is going to attract the pros, the interested amateurs, the I-hope-to-learn-something-new folks, and the idly curious or bored.

No one level of discourse will be an ideal fit to all 4 flavors in the audience. Which is different from having the same conversation at work or at the bar after work with your cow-orkers, where a) the spread is smaller, and b) you know the expertise (great or small) of all of the participants.

It is appropriate IMO for writers here to be aware of the lesser ranks of participants and don’t deliberately (or worse yet gratuitously) throw obstacles in their path to participation. And to offer a leg up on the “hard parts”, whatever those may be.

But …

There is (and needs to be) an assumption that readers will bring a decent relevant vocabulary to the party. I can’t write about something even very simple if I have to explain the common meanings of the common English words I use to audience members whose English vocabulary is tiny. That’s a reader problem, not a writer problem.

There is (and needs to be) an assumption that readers are willing to work a bit on their own to expand their vocabulary as they come across new words. Just as we all expect to learn something from these sorts of threads. That’s expanding knowledge. Demanding to never see unfamiliar vocabulary is just a stone’s throw from demanding to never see a new idea, or an old idea presented form a new angle. That sounds mighty silly. Because it is. Unwillingness to face (some) new vocabulary is also a reader problem, not a writer problem.

If it’s a gun and ammo thread and 100% of what you know about guns is that they’re loud, well, you’re likely not going to be able to bring enough relevant vocabulary to the conversation to make heads nor tails of it. And demanding to be taught from scratch right here right now in context isn’t really fair nor friendly.

My bottom line: The USAF style guide when I was in the service expected acronyms to be spelled out once on first use and never again in that publication. So it was Indicated Air Speed (“IAS”) on first use and IAS without comment thereafter.

Applied without exception that style can lead to very bureaucratic lawyerly prose defining United States of America (“USA”). In my opinion (“IMO”) don’t do that; your writing will suck. OTOH, too many undefined TLAs result in WTF. OMG!

Don’t be a jerk. Whether when writing or when reading. It ain’t that tough for most of us.


* Talk about a group with impenetrable jargon and a noxious set of shorthand and abbreviations - knitters take the cake IMO. :slight_smile:

That’s what I do if I’m going to use a term that I expect others might not understand, but I don’t want to type out the whole term repeatedly.

Here is a hypothetical… Let’s say someone asks why they can’t just buy a copy of Microsoft Office like they could in the old days, and instead have to sign up for a subscription? My answer is that many software manufacturers prefer the model called “Software as a Service”, or SaaS. SaaS allows someone like Microsoft to have a continual revenue stream from a customer, as opposed to getting one large chunk of money. It might also lower the bar of entry for customers who can’t afford to spend $400 every time a new version is released but can easily afford to pay $7 a month to always have the latest version of the software installed. (There are other advantages as well, but you get the point, hopefully.)

In such a discussion, I’m not going to type “Software as a Service” a dozen times, but I also don’t automatically expect everyone to understand what SaaS is. So, I define it once, and then use the acronym after that.

I think I picked up the idea from reading articles written by journalists who use that technique. Or maybe from technical instructions. I dunno, but it benefits the readers (who know what I’m talking about) and myself (who doesn’t need to laboriously type the same thing over and over).

That being said…

Exactly. Be reasonable about it. I think the problem is that the OP here isn’t arguing for reason.

[arrant pedantry]
The OP of this Pit thread is just fine. It’s the guest of honor / topic of this Pit thread who seems to have a problem with reasonable.
[/arrant pedantry]
:wink:

That was what all the style guides said, back when I was editing a newspaper (don’t get impressed, it was a weekly for my tiny college).

For me, it’s not so much that he isn’t being reasonable in what acronyms he doesn’t understand. It’s that he’s a complete dick about it instead of asking politely, “I’m sorry, what is SaaS?”

My mistake.

I blame the acronym!