What folks have learned via CC discussions:

[seoulsearch]

I shared my beliefs using handy acronyms for the benefit of truthseekers, but yes, what you say is what I suspected: most folks are unwilling to learn even simple things like new acronyms. Frankly, I doubt that if I spelled everything out it would change that attitude, but I intend to change my habit and see if it makes a difference. However, I am amazed that y'all's list of accepted acronyms is so short!

So I ask everyone again which acronyms in the list are too difficult to learn and need to be eliminated?

Re baptism and circumcision - WB (water baptism), SB (Spirit baptism), PC (physical circumcision) and SC (spiritual circumcision)
Re election - TULIP (God hates humanity except for a favored few) and MFW (moral free will = able to repent/seek truth)
Re apologetics - UMI (universal moral authority) and PP (propensity principle)
Re love and unity - LIC (love in Christ)
Re salvation history - GRFS (God's requirement for salvation) and POS (plan of salvation)
Re the teachings of Jesus and Paul - TOJ (teaching of Jesus) and TOP (teaching of Paul)
Re God's Word and the Holy Spirit - GW (God's Word, HS (Holy Spirit), NT (New Testament) and OT (Old Testament)
Re heaven and hell - DOD (duo of desirables)
Re Christian Chat - CC (Christian Chat)

I will try to limit my use of those that are very objectionable to the majority for some good reason.
For example, I agree that I coined DOD and use it rarely, so I intend to delete that from my vocabulary immediately.
Although I did not invent UMI, I also use that rarely and will stop using it at all.
However, I use TOJ and TOP constantly on those threads and so will not stop.
Also, I consider GRFS and PP to be divinely inspired insights, so I will not omit those.
Do y'all really not understand GW, HS, NT and OT?!
Do you really object to LIC = ?!
What else?

I hope I'm not interrupting the flow here, but I was also hoping I could share a few things as someone who has been on the forum for a while. I started writing when I got here in 2009 and have written over 1,100 threads during that time. This certainly doesn't make me an expert, it just means I've learned a lot about engaging with the audiences here.

Most people who write threads and/or want to teach seem to have the automatic attitude that the audience MUST stretch themselves to the norms and standards of the author, and if not, they are weak, insincere about their faith, lazy, and just plain stupid.

Now, a person can call me all of those things, and I'm fine with that.

But what I've found is that if you expect an audience, and especially if you want an audience that will engage with your posts, you have to at least try to meet them halfway. While you can't stop being you, you can still work to build bridges that make it easier for people to interact with you.

People are not just being lazy when they don't want to learn a whole new set of acronyms to read a post. Most people are overloaded with acronyms already in their daily life -- when I worked in retail, there were all kinds of acronyms such as PLU and UPC; my daily life now consists of keeping up with financial news, which literally has hundreds of thousands of acronyms, like CAGR -- compound annual growth rate; FFO -- funds from operations, etc.

As if that wasn't enough, every company on the stock market has its own "acronym" (ticker symbol.) Some are easy -- NVDA -- it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that this is Nvidia. But the ticker symbol O is not such a dead giveaway -- you have to remember that it stands for Realty Income.

I personally believe that as an author, you have to think of things from the audience's point of view. I can't, for example, even begin to imagine how many acronyms people in the medical field have to remember! And I would guess that almost every area of life uses a set of acronyms. Most people are just plain burned out -- not at all lazy or stupid.

And as many posters have already adeptly pointed out, when you see so many acronyms, they all blend together. I've gotten to the point where even "everyday" acronyms wear me down because "smh" (shaking my head) is also a ticker symbol for an ETF (exchange traded fund) on the stock market (SMH -- the VanEck Semiconductor ETF,) so my brain has to pause and remember the context or I will automatically exchange the meanings of the two.

By the end of the day, I'm burned out on ALL literary "shortcuts" and just want to see things written out plainly.

As a fellow thread/post author, I've asked for all kinds of feedback in my time here, and the number one thing I always hear is, "Your posts are too long." I understand that. But I've watched other people write shorter opening posts, and then the readers either have no idea what they're talking about, or the post seem so cold an impersonal that no one wants to answer.

So I've learned to compromise where I can, but also accept that my style of writing is not going to be for most people. They're probably burned out already from their everyday life and don't want to read novel-length posts on the internet, and I most certainly understand that.

But I can't really change my style into writing short posts (especially when introducing a new thread.) But I do try to look for ways to compromise. I try to edit/exchange words that might not be familiar, and exchange words with more syllables for those that have less, just to try to keep from exhausting the reader. I also try to cut out redundant information or phrases, etc.

And to some of the other helpful feedback I received, I now try to summarize all my questions at the end, so people don't have to try to remember what I asked 20 paragraphs ago when answering.

I think it's important for any author to accept that that they might only attract a very small, niche audience -- and if they want a wider audience, they really have no choice but to adapt to the people. It's just unrealistic to expect the wider audience to adapt to the author.

I'm perfectly fine with only attracting a very specific audience -- one that doesn't mind longer posts and is willing to share something about themselves in return. I'm never going to appeal to the masses or wide, vast audiences based on the fact that I still write long posts, and I'm ok with that.

It makes me all the more grateful that anyone would take so much of their rare and precious spare time to read anything I write.

I think it's wonderful, @GWH, that you are open to feedback from your readers.

But it seems like you are wanting a wider audience, and most any author who wants more eyes on their material has to learn to hone their style in a way that appeals to what the masses are willing to read and answer.

We get so many people who come here and seem to expect worldwide, eager audiences who lap up everything they say. Then they blame it on a dumb, lazy, uncommitted audience when they don't get the vast number of views or responses they seem to believe they deserve.

But from what I've seen, it just doesn't work when an author thinks everyone else should live up to their standards and they don't at least try to be flexible with the audience. And its even less effective when an author puts all the blame on the audience for not being willing to "put in the work."

It's a lot like advertising -- a company that says, "You're too stupid, poor, and lazy to afford our products!" isn't going to get nearly as many customers as one that says, "We know you have a lot of choices, and we are honored that you choose to shop with us."

But, this is just my own view -- and I could be completely wrong.

Thank you for at least being open to feedback, and may God bless you.

 

[Mem]

Thanks for your input also, Anch, but am I the only one on CC who loves to learn?
If I could learn those acronyms, anyone can, because I am a simple man.
I bet a ten-year-old could learn most of that list in two minutes; y'all are simply unwilling.

I used to love and excel at math all the way through trigonometry, but then I encountered calculus and spent the entire period unconsciously drooling in my textbook.

I only use RC = Roman Catholicism, RE/BE = Roman/Byzantine empire or emperor, EP = evangelical protestant in the HOB thread.
Don't y'all use GW = God’s Word (Scripture), OT = Old Testament (Covenant), NT = New Testament, HS = Holy Spirit, JC = Jesus Christ?

I have gone to a lot of trouble since joining CC converting my abbreviations for Bible Books used on my website [GN, EX, LV, NM, DT;MT, MK, ACTS, RM, 1CR, etc.] to the CC format for turning blue.

Surely you are not serious about attaching all of that to every post!

It is fair to assume that GW, OT, NT, HS, JC or easily understood, although the latter might paint you as being a tad irreverent to reduce our Lord and Master such a status such as JR. But at any rate, a simple solution might be that you construct a legend of acronyms that you use habitually as your signature, especially considering that, indeed, this is your signature style of writing.

However, unfortunately I am aware of Paul not wanting us to be a stumblingblock to the weak (that is a joke folks),
so I am willing to stop using the acronyms y'all hate most.

Try not to be so supercilious so that so many others have only their left cheek to offer you.

 

[GWH]

Okay, just to reprise per the OP what folks have learned via discussions on CC, here is that list of posts:

#1 - GWH, re persevering faith
#2 - passion84god, re "meet"
#5 - seoulsearch, re believer's baptism
#12 - Aussie52, re patience with haters
#20 - Chester, re need to value meaning of Scripture over church doctrine
#25- GWH, 1Cor. 2 urges Christians to cooperate with the Holy Spirit
#28 - GWH, need to add #6 re general revelation to my proposed creed
#34 - PaulThompson, arguing is futile
#42 - GWH, Cyrene was a town that traded in silphium, a plant prized for various uses
#52 - ZNP, truths one assumed all Christians believe are challenged
#56 - dkontner, modern day Pharisees and Sadducees exist on CC
#57 - Churchgoer, you cannot convert people by debate, although it can be fun
#99 - GWH, many people hate learning acronyms

TBC...

 

[Mem]

Quote: "I personally like GBAKYASHFUYAGYHP! myself."

Mem, have I got it right?

Good Bye, Acronyms! Keep Your Abbreviations Safely Hidden From Us! Your Acronyms Get You Hated Personally!

It might be: Give Back All Ketchup, Your Avocado Salad Has Fully Usurped Your Appetite, Grandma's Yelling, Hurry Please

or it might be about grandpa: Grandpa Barely Avoided Kicking Yet Another Squirrel, He Fell Upside-down, Yelling At Geese, Your Help Please

Actually, it's the Aaronic Blessing.

 

[seoulsearch]

People always want the best customer service, bedside manner, or relatable teachers for themselves, but I think they don't realize that they also have to put in the level of work when offering a "service" -- like teaching -- to others.

Let's say your beloved father just died.

If you had a choice between the two following doctors, which one would you chose?

Doctor A -- "Welp, the old man finally kicked the bucket. Cheer up, stop all that crying! You should be rejoicing because he finally made it to the Man Upstairs! Just in time, too -- my golf time is at 3 o'clock -- if he had taken much longer I would have had to reschedule, and everyone knows how much I hate to reschedule."

Doctor B -- "I'm so sorry, but our precious friend, Thomas, has gone to be with the Lord. I'm heartbroken right along with you, but I want you to know I'm here for you and you can call me anytime if you have questions."

These two doctors are conveying the very same crucial information -- your father has died -- but their bedside manners couldn't be more opposite.

A good number of people I run into want Doctor B for themselves as their teachers -- but when they want to teach someone ELSE -- they often come across as Doctor A, but refuse to recognize or do anything about it.


An author who wants an interactive audience really only has the following choices:

1. Write to appease as many people as possible, but lose some of your own personal style in the process.

2. Write to TRY to appease as many people as you THINK should engage with you -- all while talking down to them when they don't -- then wonder why you don't have a bigger audience.

3. Sulk about not having a bigger audience, pretend to work with them, but berate them the whole time while doing so -- then wonder in absolute bewilderment as to why your audience is shrinking.

4. Find your niche, no matter how big or small, and be grateful to everyone who takes the time out of their already overloaded lives to engage with you.


If you walk into a store, imagine how you want to be treated. Then imagine how your own "customers" -- your readers -- want to be spoken to (within reason, of course. I personally try to deal with obvious trolls in my threads swiftly and directly.)

When you are an author, you're offering customer service -- the better your bedside manner, the better quality and larger the audience you will attract, even if it's not as large as you were hoping for.

If you don't offer that, and expect everyone to climb to the high levels you already see yourself at -- you're going to lose a lot of good-hearted readers who simply might learn in a different manner than you -- and you will be missing out on learning incredible things from wonderful people.

 

[GWH]

I hope I'm not interrupting the flow here, but I was also hoping I could share a few things as someone who has been on the forum for a while. I started writing when I got here in 2009 and have written over 1,100 threads during that time. This certainly doesn't make me an expert, it just means I've learned a lot about engaging with the audiences here.

Most people who write threads and/or want to teach seem to have the automatic attitude that the audience MUST stretch themselves to the norms and standards of the author, and if not, they are weak, insincere about their faith, lazy, and just plain stupid.

Now, a person can call me all of those things, and I'm fine with that.

But what I've found is that if you expect an audience, and especially if you want an audience that will engage with your posts, you have to at least try to meet them halfway. While you can't stop being you, you can still work to build bridges that make it easier for people to interact with you.

People are not just being lazy when they don't want to learn a whole new set of acronyms to read a post. Most people are overloaded with acronyms already in their daily life -- when I worked in retail, there were all kinds of acronyms such as PLU and UPC; my daily life now consists of keeping up with financial news, which literally has hundreds of thousands of acronyms, like CAGR -- compound annual growth rate; FFO -- funds from operations, etc.

As if that wasn't enough, every company on the stock market has its own "acronym" (ticker symbol.) Some are easy -- NVDA -- it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that this is Nvidia. But the ticker symbol O is not such a dead giveaway -- you have to remember that it stands for Realty Income.

I personally believe that as an author, you have to think of things from the audience's point of view. I can't, for example, even begin to imagine how many acronyms people in the medical field have to remember! And I would guess that almost every area of life uses a set of acronyms. Most people are just plain burned out -- not at all lazy or stupid.

And as many posters have already adeptly pointed out, when you see so many acronyms, they all blend together. I've gotten to the point where even "everyday" acronyms wear me down because "smh" (shaking my head) is also a ticker symbol for an ETF (exchange traded fund) on the stock market (SMH -- the VanEck Semiconductor ETF,) so my brain has to pause and remember the context or I will automatically exchange the meanings of the two.

By the end of the day, I'm burned out on ALL literary "shortcuts" and just want to see things written out plainly.

As a fellow thread/post author, I've asked for all kinds of feedback in my time here, and the number one thing I always hear is, "Your posts are too long." I understand that. But I've watched other people write shorter opening posts, and then the readers either have no idea what they're talking about, or the post seem so cold an impersonal that no one wants to answer.

So I've learned to compromise where I can, but also accept that my style of writing is not going to be for most people. They're probably burned out already from their everyday life and don't want to read novel-length posts on the internet, and I most certainly understand that.

But I can't really change my style into writing short posts (especially when introducing a new thread.) But I do try to look for ways to compromise. I try to edit/exchange words that might not be familiar, and exchange words with more syllables for those that have less, just to try to keep from exhausting the reader. I also try to cut out redundant information or phrases, etc.

And to some of the other helpful feedback I received, I now try to summarize all my questions at the end, so people don't have to try to remember what I asked 20 paragraphs ago when answering.

I think it's important for any author to accept that that they might only attract a very small, niche audience -- and if they want a wider audience, they really have no choice but to adapt to the people. It's just unrealistic to expect the wider audience to adapt to the author.

I'm perfectly fine with only attracting a very specific audience -- one that doesn't mind longer posts and is willing to share something about themselves in return. I'm never going to appeal to the masses or wide, vast audiences based on the fact that I still write long posts, and I'm ok with that.

It makes me all the more grateful that anyone would take so much of their rare and precious spare time to read anything I write.

I think it's wonderful, @GWH, that you are open to feedback from your readers.

But it seems like you are wanting a wider audience, and most any author who wants more eyes on their material has to learn to hone their style in a way that appeals to what the masses are willing to read and answer.

We get so many people who come here and seem to expect worldwide, eager audiences who lap up everything they say. Then they blame it on a dumb, lazy, uncommitted audience when they don't get the vast number of views or responses they seem to believe they deserve.

But from what I've seen, it just doesn't work when an author thinks everyone else should live up to their standards and they don't at least try to be flexible with the audience. And its even less effective when an author puts all the blame on the audience for not being willing to "put in the work."

It's a lot like advertising -- a company that says, "You're too stupid, poor, and lazy to afford our products!" isn't going to get nearly as many customers as one that says, "We know you have a lot of choices, and we are honored that you choose to shop with us."

But, this is just my own view -- and I could be completely wrong.

Thank you for at least being open to feedback, and may God bless you.

Thanks, seoulsearch. That is the best feedback I have had on CC. I will comment on some of what you said:

I also compromise where I can but accept that my style of writing may not appeal to most people.
I realize the need to keep posts as succinct as possible without sacrificing truth, so I share only some at a time.

I engage with whoever posts something of interest without worrying about how wide the audience might be.
Yes, I invite feedback regarding both my writing style and whenever someone thinks I sound hateful or pejorative.

Thus, with regard to the feedback I have received about acronyms, I am considering how to compromise
by adjusting/amending my usage, assuming unwillingness to learn them is not due to laziness or obstinance.

God bless you too, and would you be offended if I said LIC?

 

[GWH]

I used to love and excel at math all the way through trigonometry, but then I encountered calculus and spent the entire period unconsciously drooling in my textbook.

It is fair to assume that GW, OT, NT, HS, JC or easily understood, although the latter might paint you as being a tad irreverent to reduce our Lord and Master such a status such as JR. But at any rate, a simple solution might be that you construct a legend of acronyms that you use habitually as your signature, especially considering that, indeed, this is your signature style of writing.

Try not to be so supercilious so that so many others have only their left cheek to offer you.

Thanks for the serious feedback, Mem.
Math lost me at trig.
I am glad you think GW, OT, NT, HS and JC are easily understood. I guess JC is akin to calling God "Daddy" (Abba).
I try not to be supersilly/cheeky.

 

[ZNP]

Actually, it's the Aaronic Blessing.

This seems more uplifting not as an acronym:“The Lord bless you and keep you; The Lord make His face shine upon you, And be gracious to you; The Lord lift up His countenance upon you, And give you peace.

 

[seoulsearch]

Thanks, seoulsearch. That is the best feedback I have had on CC. I will comment on some of what you said:

I also compromise where I can but accept that my style of writing may not appeal to most people.
I realize the need to keep posts as succinct as possible without sacrificing truth, so I share only some at a time.

I engage with whoever posts something of interest without worrying about how wide the audience might be.
Yes, I invite feedback regarding both my writing style and whenever someone thinks I sound hateful or pejorative.

Thus, with regard to the feedback I have received about acronyms, I am considering how to compromise
by adjusting/amending my usage, assuming unwillingness to learn them is not due to laziness or obstinance.

God bless you too, and would you be offended if I said LIC?

Thank you, @GWH, for being willing to listen to what I had to say. I was really hoping I wasn't just intruding on the conversation, since I know my writing style is completely different.

I greatly appreciate your time and attention, and this was the highest honor you could give me, thank you.

I do understand how frustrating it can be to try to balance what you want to say -- with brevity -- because it ALL seems important. And I'm obviously not very good at it myself! I often ask God how to word things in a better way, or a clearer way that will be easier for people to absorb.

I once had a biology professor who was trying to explain gene mutations in the most scientific language possible, but I knew it was just what he knew, and he didn't really know how to say it any other way. I was completely baffled, and you could tell by the looks on people's faces that I wasn't the only one. But the academic world was what he knew, and he didn't know how to speak any other language than what the field had given him. He didn't know how to talk to the everyday person.

I raised my hand and said, "So is what you're trying to say is that a circle -shaped gene and a square-shaped gene can naturally produce combinations of other circles and squares -- but a mutation can come along and produce a triangle-shaped gene instead?"

He thought about it a minute, and said, "Yes," -- and the entire class clapped.

When it comes to science (and a lot of other things,) I assure you, I'm as dumb as a box of rocks. But I know one of my callings from God is to try to take complex information and break it down into a way for others that even a yokel like me can understand.

In ancient history, the Rosetta stone was a breakthrough because it had a known language -- translators could then take that known language and finally have something to compare hieroglyphics to -- unlocking thousands of years of lost history.

Whenever I talk to people, I ask God for a "Rosetta stone" -- something known that they can relate to, but that I can use as an example that's familiar to them.

When a friend asked me to explain a stock options contract to her, instead of talking about it in terms of 100 shares of stock, I told her to think of it as a group of 100 sheep -- because she has a farming background, and understood that analogy very well. "Sheep" was the Rosetta stone that God gave me to be unlock something unfamiliar to her in a more familiar way.

Please believe me in that people are not just lazy when hesitant to learn more acronyms.

I recently got back from a trip to help a beloved, lifelong friend who is caring full-time for several elderly relatives, dealing with everything from being unable to walk to broken bones and dementia. Believe me, after a full day of cooking meals for grown adults who are refusing to eat, changing dressings, slings, and bedpans, and being yelled at constantly for things you have no control over -- the LAST thing anyone wants to do is try to read anything that requires additional all-out translation.

And this is the everyday reality for many of the people I know (along with the stress of working and trying to care for their own spouses and/or children.) As authors, we need to have a realistic view of how drained our readers might already be when getting to our posts.

This is why I also understand that a lot of people won't read my posts -- not because they're lazy at all! But because life is overwhelming for a whole lot of people and they're just tired and burnt out. This is also why I post a lot of my light-hearted threads -- with pictures -- to try to give people something lighter to read in between the heavier topics.

Please accept my sincere apologies in that I misinterpreted your posts as wanting a bigger audience -- I think I got that part wrong, and I am truly sorry.

Something that most definitely sets you apart is that you are at least willing to listen to feedback -- many who come here won't even do that, so thank you again for your consideration.

And, I will only accept your LIC -- Long Island City?! -- if you will please accept my GBU (Guided Bomb Unit, of course!)

But, it's meant to be a very hearty Guided Bombing of an abundance of the love of the Lord!

Thank you so much again, and I promise to try to put in a more concentrated effort when reading your posts from now on!

 

[stilllearning]

People are not just being lazy when they don't want to learn a whole new set of acronyms to read a post. Most people are overloaded with acronyms already in their daily life -- when I worked in retail, there were all kinds of acronyms such as PLU and UPC; my daily life now consists of keeping up with financial news, which literally has hundreds of thousands of acronyms, like CAGR -- compound annual growth rate; FFO -- funds from operations, etc.

As if that wasn't enough, every company on the stock market has its own "acronym" (ticker symbol.) Some are easy -- NVDA -- it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that this is Nvidia. But the ticker symbol O is not such a dead giveaway -- you have to remember that it stands for Realty Income.

I personally believe that as an author, you have to think of things from the audience's point of view. I can't, for example, even begin to imagine how many acronyms people in the medical field have to remember! And I would guess that almost every area of life uses a set of acronyms. Most people are just plain burned out -- not at all lazy or stupid.

And as many posters have already adeptly pointed out, when you see so many acronyms, they all blend together. I've gotten to the point where even "everyday" acronyms wear me down because "smh" (shaking my head) is also a ticker symbol for an ETF (exchange traded fund) on the stock market (SMH -- the VanEck Semiconductor ETF,) so my brain has to pause and remember the context or I will automatically exchange the meanings of the two.

By the end of the day, I'm burned out on ALL literary "shortcuts" and just want to see things written out plainly.

LOL.....So true and so funny.......LOL A number of years back I found I was liking some foreign equities that I wanted to trade as well as invest in. Well some did not have their ADR (American Depository Receipt) more or less what allows them to be listed on an American exchange.

So I dug in to find out how I may be able to purchase them. So I had to get a broker that offers admittance to buying them on their local exchange. So the first exchange I go and look at is the Chinese Shenzhen exchange. Well their tickers or symbols are numbers. Such as BYD the ev auto maker their symbol is 002594. I saw the numbers and said oh no way I will just stick to buying foreign stocks on our market that have their ADR and are listed............LOL

 

[stilllearning]

Now to keep with the OP and purpose of this thread. As my last post exemplifies I have learnt that sometimes I have more in common with folks than I may have realized.

 

[Anchorite]

Thus, with regard to the feedback I have received about acronyms, I am considering how to compromise
by adjusting/amending my usage, assuming unwillingness to learn them is not due to laziness or obstinance.

You might also consider the fact that others might start developing their own PLOA (private list of acronyms) and expecting people to MTA (memorize the acronyms) and UTC (use them consistently).

Soon, the forum would be loaded with posts that make sense only to the AAU (adept acronym users), and confusing everyone else.

Unwillingness to learn your acronyms? It is more like it is unnecessary to learn them, since you could just spell out the words. You should not label people as lazy or stubborn, just because they don’t want to memorize your list of idiosyncratic acronyms, which they will use nowhere else.

 

[seoulsearch]

So I dug in to find out how I may be able to purchase them. So I had to get a broker that offers admittance to buying them on their local exchange. So the first exchange I go and look at is the Chinese Shenzhen exchange. Well their tickers or symbols are numbers. Such as BYD the ev auto maker their symbol is 002594. I saw the numbers and said oh no way I will just stick to buying foreign stocks on our market that have their ADR and are listed............LOL

LOL!! I'm picturing asking @stilllearning, "What was your day like?"

And he answers, "347 825 960 213 487" -- (translation) "It looked like this! Thanks for asking!"

 

[stilllearning]

LOL!! I'm picturing asking @stilllearning, "What was your day like?"

And he answers, "347 825 960 213 487" -- (translation) "It looked like this! Thanks for asking!"

View attachment 292666

View attachment 292667

LOL......Indeed, and it turned me into a Flock of Seagulls and I ran, I ran so far away.........LOL

 

[Cameron143]

LOL......Indeed, and it turned me into a Flock of Seagulls and I ran, I ran so far away.........LOL

Careful, they couldn't get away.

And appreciate your service.

 

[GWH]

You might also consider the fact that others might start developing their own PLOA (private list of acronyms) and expecting people to MTA (memorize the acronyms) and UTC (use them consistently).

Soon, the forum would be loaded with posts that make sense only to the AAU (adept acronym users), and confusing everyone else.

Unwillingness to learn your acronyms? It is more like it is unnecessary to learn them, since you could just spell out the words. You should not label people as lazy or stubborn, just because they don’t want to memorize your list of idiosyncratic acronyms, which they will use nowhere else.

And YOU might consider that all disciplines have a jargon known by practitioners, including theology
so my desire for folks to learn acronyms commonly used in that discipline is not a sin.

I already conceded that the objections to learning some new ones might be due to unwillingness rather than to laziness,
but since they could easily be "memorized" by encountering them only once, I bet obstinance is involved.

However, I am willing for unhandy acronyms not to be a stumbling-block, so I do not intend to use them any longer.
I agree that DOD, UMI and POS are rarely used and thus not handy, but I use GRFS, MFW, PP, TOJ and TOP almost daily.

I agree to limit the use of WB (water baptism), SB (Spirit baptism), PC (physical circumcision) and SC (spiritual circumcision) to threads or discussions about baptism and circumcision.

Mem said GW, OT, NT, HS and JC are okay, and I am surprised y'all object to LIC, although perhaps I should not be.

So, I hope everyone will appreciate my improvement, although I am not breaking my "bad" habit cold-turkey.

 

[seoulsearch]

LOL.....So true and so funny.......LOL A number of years back I found I was liking some foreign equities that I wanted to trade as well as invest in. Well some did not have their ADR (American Depository Receipt) more or less what allows them to be listed on an American exchange.

So I dug in to find out how I may be able to purchase them. So I had to get a broker that offers admittance to buying them on their local exchange. So the first exchange I go and look at is the Chinese Shenzhen exchange. Well their tickers or symbols are numbers. Such as BYD the ev auto maker their symbol is 002594. I saw the numbers and said oh no way I will just stick to buying foreign stocks on our market that have their ADR and are listed............LOL

If I may say just a little more about the acronyms, @stilllearning's post gives a perfect example.

Most people know at least a little about money. Some people know a lot about money. Let's say I was on a forum for people who know about money and want to learn better ways to manage it.

If I wrote a post saying, "I just bought a few shares of DRAM ETF to get exposure to SKHY without having to go through the foreign markets," very few people would know what I was talking about.

It's all in English, but it's highly specified English regarding a very particular topic and space.

But what if I told everyone, "Wait a minute! You people said you know about money! Some of you even claim to know a lot about money!! So why on earth don't you understand what I'm saying?!! What's the matter? Are you too stupid, lazy, or stubborn to learn a few new acronyms?! You must not really care about being a good steward of God's money! If you were SERIOUS about managing and multiplying your talents, you would either already know, or be willing to learn!"

And this would be utterly ridiculous.

I see Christianity the same way. Most people here are Christians, but at all different levels, and from all different backgrounds. What's second nature to one person is an entirely different language to another, and we can't just speak our own language and automatically expect others to know or want to learn it.

I've had the honor of getting to know several regular members here and see little glimpses into their lives, including meeting some of them in person. Many people I know here are reading and answering posts on 15-minute work breaks, in between cleaning up after sick kids, during a coffee break after the boss has just yelled at them, at the end of the day right before their special-needs family member has yet another meltdown...

Many people really want to participate on the forum, but don't have the time or energy for posts that require their own dictionary. They need something easy to read and reply to in order to interact. We can't dismiss people as dumb or lazy just because they have busy lives.

Now, I understand different threads/posts will attract different kinds of audiences, but I think we have to temper our expectations to people's actual lives.

Sure, some threads and posts will require a lot more time, care, and though for those who answer, and that's fine. But anyone who writes these things has to know there will be a much smaller audience tailored to that specific level of discussion -- and a lot less interaction because of it.

I understand that when I write a serious, long thread, there might not even be one person that answers -- and that's ok. And it's not because people are lazy or unwilling to learn -- maybe it just wasn't of interest, or maybe I really did say too much for anyone to want to read.

But when I write a more light-hearted thread, I know I have to do things like add pictures, list questions in a very easy-to-read format, and make it fun and easy for the reader to answer (which is why I write a lot of polls -- it's the simplest option for those too busy to type.) And I also know that those thread will usually get a lot more responses.

We can't make threads and posts that resemble a Marvel Cinematic Universe movie, where you have to have watched 50 movies and 20 television series first to know what's going on, and expect people to jump at answering.

Rather, I think it's a greater service to readers to give them a little background information so they feel like they at least know the plot.

We had a thread in Singles about going on a cruise where someone made a joke about bringing giraffes, and now that joke is being carried on in several other threads.

When I "narrate" the thread, I try to bring the reader up to speed on things like inside jokes, because I don't want people to think they have to read 4 other threads front to back to know what's going on and join in.

Of course, this can change, depending on your purpose for writing. I write a lot of serious threads with a "bait and switch" style (the title says one thing, but if one reads the introductory post, they find out it's about something else.) The regular participants and I have found that this quickly weeds out anyone wanting to just come in and preach without reading the history behind the thread in the OP.

Again, these are just my own experiences, and my suggestions might not help at all in the Bible Discussion Forum -- I realize it's a completely different arena.

But I do want to thank anyone who has taken the time to read these posts.

I very much appreciate your time and grace, thank you!

 

[Anchorite]

And YOU might consider that all disciplines have a jargon known by practitioners, including theology
so my desire for folks to learn acronyms commonly used in that discipline is not a sin.

I already conceded that the objections to learning some new ones might be due to unwillingness rather than to laziness,
but since they could easily be "memorized" by encountering them only once, I bet obstinance is involved.

However, I am willing for unhandy acronyms not to be a stumbling-block, so I do not intend to use them any longer.
I agree that DOD, UMI and POS are rarely used and thus not handy, but I use GRFS, MFW, PP, TOJ and TOP almost daily.

I agree to limit the use of WB (water baptism), SB (Spirit baptism), PC (physical circumcision) and SC (spiritual circumcision) to threads or discussions about baptism and circumcision.

Mem said GW, OT, NT, HS and JC are okay, and I am surprised y'all object to LIC, although perhaps I should not be.

So, I hope everyone will appreciate my improvement, although I am not breaking my "bad" habit cold-turkey.

Then you are the one being lazy and obstinate.

It doesn’t matter to me if you continue to make posts that contain your own private acronyms. You are only hurting yourself in terms of people understanding you.

Specialized jargon? Yes, religious discussions use technical theological terms like propitiation, atonement, repentance, baptism. But not acronyms, aside from TULIP, NT, and OT.

How hard is it to type God’s Word? You really need to use GW?

Your acronyms are able to be memorized by encountering them only once?

That sure sounds arrogant to me.

But I encourage you to persist in reducing your intelligibility by using acronyms, if you wish to be so self-centered and stubborn about it. Enjoy it.

 

[GWH]

Then you are the one being lazy and obstinate.

It doesn’t matter to me if you continue to make posts that contain your own private acronyms. You are only hurting yourself in terms of people understanding you.

Specialized jargon? Yes, religious discussions use technical theological terms like propitiation, atonement, repentance, baptism. But not acronyms, aside from TULIP, NT, and OT.

How hard is it to type God’s Word? You really need to use GW?

Your acronyms are able to be memorized by encountering them only once?

That sure sounds arrogant to me.

But I encourage you to persist in reducing your intelligibility by using acronyms, if you wish to be so self-centered and stubborn about it. Enjoy it.

No, you are being unreasonable, because I am being willing to amend my use of acronyms.
It has nothing to do with anyone being hurt!

Specialized jargon includes acronyms. It is obvious you never served in the military.

I use GW because I love Scripture and feel blessed that my initials are GW, so sue me.

Yes, acronyms can be learned quickly; they are not rocket science formulas.
Rather than being arrogant, I assume everyone on CC is intelligent until proven otherwise.

You discourage, but I will amend my sinful ways per post #116.

 

[Anchorite]

No, you are being unreasonable, because I am being willing to amend my use of acronyms.
It has nothing to do with anyone being hurt!

Specialized jargon includes acronyms. It is obvious you never served in the military.

I use GW because I love Scripture and feel blessed that my initials are GW, so sue me.

Yes, acronyms can be learned quickly; they are not rocket science formulas.
Rather than being arrogant, I assume everyone on CC is intelligent until proven otherwise.

You discourage, but I will amend my sinful ways per post #116.

What makes you the authoritative purveyor of acronyms in this forum?

If the owner of this forum developed acronyms and wanted every member to use them, that would be a different story.

Your private acronyms will not be learned quickly or remembered, since they are used only in your posts. And most people probably do not even know how to find your explanation of them all.

You expect people to jump through hoops just to accommodate your peculiar mode of posting. You assume that if people do not meet your expectations, they must be lazy, stubborn, or dumb. That is arrogant and unfriendly.

So go on doing what you do. It does not matter in the long run.