Buffy ,'Showtime'
A thread to discuss naming threads, board policy, new thread suggestions, and anything else that has to do with board administration and maintenance. Guaranteed to include lively debate and polls. Natter discouraged, but not deleted.
Current Stompy Feet: ita, Jon B, DXMachina, P.M. Marcontell, Liese S., amych
Four and Twenty Natters: WHO ARE YOU BAKING FOR?!?!?!?!?!
As far as thread naming goes, I feel like a similar pattern often repeats itself. We have several suggestions of short, clever thread titles. Then someone combines them into one longer, clunkier, less clever title. Everyone but me raves over it. It is selected.
Sigh.
Okay, this is so my personal ish.
Carry on.
If I only had time to play with those numbers, find correlations and geek out properly.
You could do a paper ...
Then someone combines them into one longer, clunkier, less clever title.
But if well combined (which I think this one is, aside from my aforestated interrobang issues (how about ??!?!!?! ?)), wouldn't that rate as cleverer?
I'm with Burrell on the pattern. Although I think this one's pretty much okay.
You could do a paper ...
How much of the data do you have? t /I don't believe I'm asking this
But if well combined (which I think this one is, aside from my aforestated interrobang issues (how about ??!?!!?! ?)), wouldn't that rate as cleverer?
Clearly the judgement about what constitutes clever is subjective. In my book, longer and overly complexicated (not a word, but should be) is almost always less clever.
In my book, longer and overly complexicated (not a word, but should be) is almost always less clever.
Also slap dash jumbles strike me as less clever, most of the time. I don't like combos to work two popular suggestions into one please-em-all title, either.
I like the unlikely pairing of referants along a funny hinge. But I prefer the layering of allusions, and I also like the sillier image of Jack demanding "Who are you baking for?!?" I don't know which of the earlier shorter would be deemed wittier, but none were even remotely as amusing.
How much of the data do you have?
Not enough, so go back to what you were doing, young lady. Only 5 weeks of logs.
(I can start keeping more, if you want)
I don't know which of the earlier shorter would be deemed wittier, but none were even remotely as amusing.
Even though one of them was mine (you bastard!) I have to agree.
My issue is that people choose titles other than the one I'd have chosen, whether it be long, short, portmanteau or a Beatles ref.
It should stop.
Oh please, ita, like you have any pull here. You're female, and don't know spoilers. (cf. Minearverse.)