|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 12:58 pm
I'm being serious here. This is how I'm going to break it down:
Self-translability
Webdings: Got a copy of wordpad? Cutpaste, then convert to another font. Simple.
Txt-Tlk: There are a few translators but overall they're complete s**t.
Webdings: 1 Txt-tlk: 0
Usability
Webdings: Ususally used as a joke, but if you're bored enough you can teach yourself.
Txt-tlk: used everywhere, but there's no place where it won't make you look like a retard.
Webdings: 2 Txt-tlk: 0
Eye strain
Webdings: Awesome. You can make scenes and lanscapes and terrorist acts out of webdings.
Txt-tlk: Get that s**t out of my face.
Webdings: 3 Txt-tlk: 0
Emote compatibility
Webdings: Ruins it, unfortunately.
Txt-tlk: Usually overused to a stupid level, so Webdings gets the point.
Webdings: 4 Txt-tlk: 0
Moronic compatibility
Webdings: You're only gonna use it as a joke, so you must be reasonably smart or funny.
Txt-tlk: UR A MORUN LEIK U NO
Webdings: 5 Txt-tlk: 0
Therefore, why not make Webdings the default netspeak?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 5:58 pm
Txt tlk, in all its grotesque existance, is much more legible than Webdings. In Webdings, once symbol can mean more than two letters. Thus very confusing.
On a human translation, anyway.
However, for any other case I agree wholly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 7:20 pm
I find txt tlk much more legible. I can hardly read Webdings. In my case, it's probably because I know how to speak txt tlk and I use it when I'm too busy or in a hurry to spell things out. I guess it's objective, though most people would be able to read txt tlk because they're exposed to it often.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 7:27 pm
I think that 'txt tlk' is much more legible than webdings, because on Gaia there are so many who use 'txt tlk' that I finally learned to understand it. Also, I just haven't learned to read webdings, so I can't say much about that. It's just not that interesting for me to use symbols like webdings instead of actual letters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 9:41 pm
On Self-translatablility: LAZY. Yes, an eyeburning capital word that is illogically being used as a sentence is smack dab in the front of my reply. Anyways, most "txt-tlkers" are just too lazy and "don't have the time" to do something as simple as copying and pasting unless it's for their own entertainment. As an added setback, the internet programs that some people use just happen to not support Webdings. It can be irritating...
Most people that use "txt tlk" think that it's faster, easier to use, and just plain better than typing normally. LIES, I TELL YOU. Some of them are pretty intelligent and/or friendly, but most of them (that I haven't actually met in real life) use it because a) they are just lazy bums, b) they just love to be annoying, c) they really just can't spell the words properly, and d) any combination of the above. Spelling is an issue too when it comes to online communication. I've seen some really nicest, friendly Gaians you could ever meet misspell some of the simplest words in the English language...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 11:16 pm
Dorali I find txt tlk much more legible. I can hardly read Webdings. In my case, it's probably because I know how to speak txt tlk and I use it when I'm too busy or in a hurry to spell things out. I guess it's objective, though most people would be able to read txt tlk because they're exposed to it often. Not always a good thing to admit in a Grammar guild. However, in the case you pointed out, I would agree with you that it can be handy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 3:52 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 1:45 pm
I like using Webdings for banner stuff.
I use "txt-tlk" on cellphones...
I really discourage using it outside of that.
Except when I have to write a note on a inch-long paper, and I have to write about five sentences to my friend.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:18 pm
*Snicker* That was quite amusing indeed.
I also think that Webdings is better because you can still write completely legibly and grammatically correct in Webdings, while when you use 'txt tlk', you cannot. I don't use 'txt tlk' at all; not even for text messaging on cellphones. I don't care if it takes a while to write things out on the cellphone. I almost never text anyone anyway due to it costing money.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2007 11:05 am
When I was little and got a computer, all I did was "txt tlk" because I was just following the trend of my friends. However, over a period of time I started spelling out my words. I guess it was because growing up a majority of them would be vocabulary words and to practice I would use them online. Then I just got into the habit of using full words all the time. Even when I text I use proper english. Except that one time on new years... BUT that's a different story. sweatdrop
Since I started out using "txt tlk" it is much easier for me to decode.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2007 1:49 pm
I can read "txt tlk", whereas with wingdings you'd have to copy and paste into word pad and change the font.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 12:22 am
What if someone were to type txt talk with webdings? Would that be like dividing by zero?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 7:18 am
Chase Keyhole: I can too, but wingdings doesn't hurt your eyes to decode.
Astral Sun: Double the translation. Uegh.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 7:42 am
Ha! That was pretty funny!
Then again, I am a 'ding', so who really knows what I think? rofl
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 5:11 pm
I don't think that Webdings is more legible. You have to learn a whole new set of symbols for letters if you want to use it frequently. At least "txt tlk" is a form of English and is mostly understandable. It's just annoying.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
