Chris Bannister wrote: > nv wrote: > > Chris Bannister wrote: > > > > tl;dr: Is it recommended that I use apt-pinning to upgrade some > > > > packages to > > > > > > Weird, considering yours was the long post and not Andrei's > > > > Eek! I meant no disrespect! :) I ALWAYS read the whole reply. I think your "faux pax" was putting it at the end. If you had put it at the top as a summary of the post and the details below with that type of an indication then I think the meaning would have been more clear. I understand what you meant to say now. But at the time I read it I was also somewhat confused by it. > > Wikipedia page. In some places, particularly, slashdot.org, I have > > seen "tl;dr" used also as a self-summarizing of one's own posting. Of Yes. And in casual communications. > So it can also mean "too long don't read"? After all it is an acronym > and the letters are supposed to mean something. :( > > I wonder why/how it started being abused in that way ... I don't know but I have both seen it used that way and have used it that way myself. When used that way it is functionally equivalent to the old traditional "Executive Summary:" with the short snippet for the busy high ranked executive who both didn't have the time nor the knowledge to understand the details. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_summary Except that "TL;DR" is used more of a joking poke at today's ADD readers that aren't too busy to read something through from start to finish but have instead too much of an attention (shiny!) deficient (squirrel!) losing focus and not able to finish a > > course, I see now that I probably should have placed it at the top for > > better clarity, or used, "tl;dr version:," perhaps. > > Do you see it as abuse, or just following a trend? I see it as a current trend in pop culture. A "meme". Many things in pop culture are technically wrong but exist that way just the same. This creates the difference between formal language and colloquial language. Use of "TL;DR" is definitely colloquial. > Really? Is this is an example of acronym abuse evolving right before > our very eyes? The etymology of this second meaning would be an > interesting read. Language continuously evolves. The spoken language of Shakespeare is almost impossible for me to understand when listened to with my ears. And I am sure the reverse would be too. "Cool" never goes out of style. "Nice" is pretty stable. But "rad", "sweet", "sick", "wicked" only time will tell if they make it long term. > Curiouser and curiouser! Cried Alice (she was so much surprised, that > for the moment she quite forgot how to speak good English). "When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less." "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things." "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master that's all." Bob
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature