Welcome, Stella!

We all have family, and many of us find we are more critical of our own family than others are or than we are of others....because we are close to them and feel free sharing our feelings. That's a good thing. OEDILF is a part of our family. Since you've been "trolling around," I assume that you saw that OEDILF started here on Wordcraft. Many of us were integral in the beginning of that project, and some of us (me, Bob Hale, Richard English) still post and workshop there and have since the project first started here. So I'd hardly say that we are "portraying" it poorly. We are just quite close to it and know its strengths and weaknesses. One other thing...we all have different opinions; some, and rightfully so, think the contradictory advice can be inefficient and lengthens the project. Many have requested a bit more organization of the workshopping. Others, like you, don't care.

At any rate, we hope you enjoy Wordcraft! I see you're from outside the U.S. (from your spelling of "realise"), and we not only love newbies, but we enjoy having a diverse site with different countries being represented. We talk about words and language and often will bring OEDILF questions here. CJ still posts with us every so often, by the way.

And a warm welcome from me, too.

I assume from your writing style that you are from the UK - along with the correct spelling of "realise" I spotted your rather nice phrase, "...didn't garner enough general approval...". I somehow can't imagine that flowing readily from the fountain pen of an American.

If you wish to share it, you can add your location to your profile. As you will see from mine, I live in West Sussex.

If you would like to meet some of us, check the community page and the details of our Wordcraft Convention. This year it's to be held in Chicago, following our successful first Convention last year in Birmingham, UK.

Hi stella. Welcome to wordcraft.

Don't get the impression that anyone here is anti-OEDILF. AFter all it all started out here and though Chris doesn't have much time to spend here nowadays he was one of the earliest and most prolific contributers to wordcraft.

It's just that some people (not me, I'm up there among the bulk contributers to the OEDILF) don't get on with the workshopping over there. That's fine. It drives me nuts at times (check out the workshopping on my aardwolf piece!). Not everyone wants to pick over every syllable and every rhyme and that's OK. One man's meat is another man's poison, as they say.

Any limericks that you have that don't fit there are welcome here and if you like to write you should also check out our threads on Double Dactyls. (Posh limericks )

Look forward to seeing more contributions from you here.

Thanks Kalleh, Richard and Bob for your responses and your welcomes. I really wasn’t intending to criticise, just to present my experience on that site as a beginner.

The other point I forgot to make was how impressed I was with the standard of limericks over there - especially Kalleh’s, Richard’s and Bob’s!

I guess the bulk of your writers are Trans-Atlantic, Richard, and I’m not offended in the least that you assume I’m either American or British. Actually I’m Antipodean, from NZ, but we speak the Queen’s English (more or less)!!

I see Kalleh picked up the word ‘trolling’,
It’s a word that I am wildly extolling!
I don’t mean I’m luring,
Or favours procuring.
I just mean I’m lollingly scrolling.

Those who sneer at the syntax American
Are behaving a bit like the pelican.
They risk swelling of head
Over how things are said.
Their craniums hold more than their belly can.

quote:

Originally posted by stella:

The other point I forgot to make was how impressed I was with the standard of limericks over there - especially Kalleh’s, Richard’s and Bob’s!

I think you'll fit in very well around here.

quote:

I somehow can't imagine that flowing readily from the fountain pen of an American.

Ahhh...not so quick, Richard. Americans would use that phrase.

Yippee! We are excited to have someone from New Zealand. I will alert Wordmatic to that (she posts on OEDILF, too) because she will be in New Zealand right around the time we'll be holding our Wordcraft Gathering in Chicago. I will look at some of your limericks over there (considering your nice compliment ).

quote:

I’m not offended in the least that you assume I’m either American or British.

In fact, I tried to say that I thought you were British and that your words indicated to me that you were NOT from the USA.

I once heard that New Zealand (or parts of it) are "more English than England".

I am more than a bit offended at the implied snobbery of the comments made here about how Americans use and abuse the language. Generalities rarely are laudatory; usually they are quite the oppposite.

I suspect that a serious study would show that Americans do not use any more ethnocentric jargon than do the English. In fact, ethnocentric jargon is common to all cultural groups, regardless of their language.

I bring up this idea because much of the usage that my English friends impugn is the result of culturally specific jargon rather than an ignorance of proper forms.

Welcome, Stella--
And thanks, Kalleh, for pointing me to this thread (for some reason, since before the holidays, I've been very lax in my participation, especially at OEDILF, but here also. I jump from Q & A about words to Wordplay and then leave. I think because it's winter here, I'm semi-hibernating!)

Ah, but it is not winter in Stella's land; it's summer--a summer that is finally warming up, according to my sister, who lives in Palmerston North. We'll be there in mid-to-late March, early autumn, starting in Christchurch and working our way north, spending our last week entirely on the North Island. Where are you in New Zealand, Stella?

I can vouch for the fact that you speak the Queen's English, but when my sister's son plays "tinnis" and her friends call my brother "Frid," well, we Americans, at least, need to tune our brains in order to understand. I'm sure New Zealanders have the same problem in reverse with Americans. In fact, I'm sure of it. My sister, a physiotherapist working with the elderly, was forced to modify her accent, because her patients could not understand her!


As for limericks and workshopping and the OEDILF, I go in spurts. Sometimes I love it and am addicted to it, and at others, tired of and bored with it. Winter doldrums? I guess another month or two will tell.

Anyway, welcome, and I believe you've garnered the interest and friendship of all of us!

Wordmatic

Thanks for your welcome, wordmatic. I stumbled on to this site (as one does) and feel much like a novice in erudite company!

I find differences in accents and word usage fascinating. We think our American friends are hilarious the way they come up with pithy, colourful phrases that fit the situation perfectly (is that what Jo means by culturally specific jargon?). At other times we think they use an awful lot of words where just a few would do!!!

I can imagine you struggle with the Kiwi accent sometimes, especially as we generally speak pretty fast. I'm not sure about Richard's point about being more English than the English - that was true once eg you had to have a 'BBC voice' to get a job in radio or TV but not any more - we've become much more accepting of being ourselves in recent years.

I hope you have a great trip to NZ and that the weather is good to you. I live in Hawkes Bay on the east coast of the North Island only a few hours from Palmerston North, which I know well.


stella

quote:

I can vouch for the fact that you speak the Queen's English, but when my sister's son plays "tinnis" and her friends call my brother "Frid," well, we Americans, at least, need to tune our brains in order to understand.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that New Zealanders (or for that matter, Australians) SPEAK the Queen's English. Both accents are very different from any kind of UK English (although I understand that most Americans can't tell the difference between UK and antipodean English).

But so far as WRITING is concerned there are many similarities and I always enjoy reading Jennifer Stewart's writing tips - Jennifer Stewart [jennifer@write101.com] - most of which are perfectly valid in UK English, for all that she lives in Australia.

quote:

(although I understand that most Americans can't tell the difference between UK and antipodean English).

I suppose it depends on what you mean about "most" (again you like to generalize). However, "most" people I know can discern the accents. I think it's more a matter of being around people with those accents. The accents are really quite different.

quote:

Anyway, welcome, and I believe you've garnered the interest and friendship of all of us!

WM, are you sure you're not from the UK?

Obviously one has to generalise when one is talking about the characteristics of 300 million people - but that is my impression from discussions with the many Americans I have met and other English people who have formed a similar opinion.

I recall especially a girl I met at Atlanta airport and struck up a conversation with. It was one of those "Wow!" moments, although, sadly, she was going to Chicago and I was going to London. We talked for some time and she was saying how much she loved my country, but it wasn't until she was speaking about how wet and hot it was that I began to wonder. When she told me she had been staying in the far north, I realised that it was not the UK, but Australia that she had visited! She, at least, admitted that she couldn't tell the difference between my accent and that of Australians.

quote:

She, at least, admitted that she couldn't tell the difference between my accent and that of Australians.

Well, of course you all sound the same. You all look alike, too.</tongue in cheek>

quote:

Obviously one has to generalise when one is talking about the characteristics of 300 million people - but that is my impression from discussions with the many Americans I have met and other English people who have formed a similar opinion.

One of the areas we ponder in research is generalizability. Surely no one (including you, I know) would apply his or her findings to an n of 1, such as the lady in the Atlanta airport. Yet, even though you've met many more people, I can't think that you've even met 0.1% of our population (30,000). We have such a diverse population that you will find many variations, depending on your sample. I am certain, for example, that you would find a significant difference in responses from our board (regarding any language questions) than you would at some random American airport. While I am being far too technical, I agree, I also am trying to get you to contemplate that you really do need to think carefully before you make assumptions about a group of people.

I you never generalise then you can never make any claims, about any group, anywhere, any time, about anything. There will almost always be a person or some people who do not fit the pattern, thus "disproving" the generalisation (of course, even that statement is a generalisation).

Richard, I am not saying that you can never generalize, but I am saying that one must be cautious before doing so. I don't always think people are. Think of all the hurtful stereotypes that are around about certain cultural groups that arose out of generalizations.

I suspect we are on the same page here, though I think you tend to have some unfounded stereotypes about Americans.

Americans, and for that matter, any other non-random group of people or things, do tend to have certain characteristics. Grouping, categorizing, finding similarities and differences in things--such activities are fundamental to our thought processes. It would be silly to deny that you do this. Some stereotypes are dated or flat out wrong, and they should be changed. Those changes might not happen unless people express them and set them out there for discussion, though. The real mistake you have to guard against is assigning the characteristics of the group to the individual.

quote:

The real mistake you have to guard against is assigning the characteristics of the group to the individual.

Or vice versa.

[laughs through his big jewish nose] Well said, Richard.

I'm on the limerick thread, I hope this is OK!

So you have a big nose do you, Shu?
So's my Dad, although he's not a Jew.
He's an all-round big bloke
Who can laugh at a joke
'Bout his big nose and big buttaroo!

And thank you to everyone over here who's helped me out over there lately!

On Wordcraft I really must tell a
Few people of newbie...dear Stella.
Keep posting with us
(We'll try not to cuss!),
And hope that you'll not say, "Farewell-a!"

Okay... here is my anti-OEDILF rant for the day.

Who the hell does Virgil Keys think he is??? Is there a rule that says only one submitter per household? My husband and I share a computer so I imagine we have the same IP address. And what if I want to post under alter egos? If I posted under more than one name, would anyone care? Why? Wouldn't it just boost their numbers and make them look like a bigger and better site? A little help here people...

I had heard of no such rule on OEDILF and I suspect a misunderstanding. Why don't you pm CJ? It's his baby, after all.

Of course I know well kangaroo
And platypus (wallabies too)
My knowledge increases
Of Antipodes species
So which one is called butteroo?

It has to be a misunderstanding. I know of at least two other instances over there where multiple members of a household use the same computer with different names.

There was hpwever an incident last year (probably before you were there TrossL) where one person was posting under about twenty different names without having told anyone. There was a big row over it. The result was a kind of informal agreement that we wouldn't post under multiple names without at first informing the administrators of the site with a reason. It was eventually seen as a matter of politeness. It did cause considerable nastiness and ill feeling among some members as they felt they were deliberately being misled by the person in question.

PM CJ or Virge about it. There isn't any rule against it.

quote:

Originally posted by BobHale:
PM CJ or Virge about it. There isn't any rule against it.

Actually it all started with Virge PMing me regarding this issue. Seems Virge saw that my IP address was used to submit under 2 different names and (horror of horrors) upon his further delving into the system he saw that another screen name logged on within 10 seconds of my signing off. Of course this type of behavior was not to be tolerated.
I had no idea there were rules about this. They are not posted anywhere. How would someone know?

I created the alterego "sockpuppet" because I thought that having that as a screen name was funny as hell. That's the term we used to use here when someone did just that. And then when CJ made up a limerick , inspired by one of sockpuppet's, with the 3rd line containing all the letters of "He detects Trossarello", I just figured he knew and was playing along.

I'm going to have a bumpersticker made up saying,
"Trossl - sowing the seeds of nefarious deeds wherever she goes."

This message has been edited. Last edited by: TrossL,

I don't read the forum there often, but when I have, I have seen that they detest sockpuppets, as Bob has indicated above. I never could understand why, to be honest. What's the difference?

Funny, TrossL, I saw that new sockpuppet person and thought it might start a bit of a row over there because I know of their strange reaction to it sockpuppets. Who knows; we may have a few here too. I could care less (that last phrase was for you, TrossL; an inside joke ).

It sounds like CJ doesn't care since he was playing along, so I am confused about Virge's reaction. He and CJ run the site together. I am also surprised that Virge has the time to check IP addresses.

Well CJ claims he had no idea. It was just a coincidence that those letters happened to be the anagram of what he wrote. Okay.

And yes, back in the day, I sockpuppeted a very dark side of me here on wordcraft. Just a little free therapy for me at the time.

I must say though. If I ever post on any other site anywhere, I will forever use the screenname sockpuppet. I think it is too funny.

quote: I will forever use the screenname sockpuppet.

Laughing. Myself, I'm rather partial to doppelgänger.

Tross, you'd better grab the 'sockpuppet' name for this board quickly, before someone else grabs it.

I've just looked at SockPuppet's limericks and very good they are too but something in the workshopping shows why people get a little upset about the practice. SockPuppet has been greeted as a newcomer, welcomed into the fold and complimented on such fine first submissions. That's what happened when we had the blow up last year (although there the person had about twenty names). When people find out they feel cheated, as if the person they have welcomed into their home has turned out to be an imposter. It doesn't especially bother me (though you need to submit all your limericks under one name if you ever want to make it to Workshop Editor) but I can see why it does bother some people.

quote:

Originally posted by shufitz:
quote: Tross, you'd better grab the 'sockpuppet' name for this board quickly, before someone else grabs it.

Done!

quote:

When people find out they feel cheated, as if the person they have welcomed into their home has turned out to be an imposter.

Well, everyone has his/her own irritations, of course. However, I can't imagine being irritated by that, Bob, unless of course the sockpuppet did so merely to cause trouble. Obviously that wasn't what TrossL was doing. To be honest, I can completely see having a sockpuppet on OEDILF because people there tend to be typecast.

quote:

Well CJ claims he had no idea. It was just a coincidence that those letters happened to be the anagram of what he wrote. Okay.

Now that is a coincidence. I wonder what the chances of that would be. The mathematical part of me says that he knew. You have figured out, Sockie, that CJ has a great deal of admiration for you, right? In his eyes, TrossL can do nothing wrong. I suspect he just didn't want to admit it. That he felt he must lie is kind of a compliment to you.

I think Virge does have time to check IP addresses. I joined OEDILF first and then checked out the forum. I saw a similar name to mine there, so decided to change the one I'd used to join OEDILF. Then I got a message from Virge asking me to use the same name for both. So, for whatever reason, I’d say he is checking ...

...then I got a message from Chris welcoming me back as returning member!

Moving right on ... or perhaps back ... to the buttaroo ...

Widely known is the Buttaroo beast,
It’s found near and far, West to East.
Downunder we’ve got ‘em
(A pair is a bottom)
Hope you’ve got ‘em too-- one at least.

O'Malley, the cop, likes a meal
He can eat while he's steering his wheel;
And with bad guys to rout
He has never copped out--
But his wife says he has copped a feel.

By the time they get to co- words who knows where I'll be? I wrote this one day at lunch. It contains three different meanings for the word cop.

Now TrossL I think you should stop --
Those tales of O'Malley, please crop.
It's true that he's felt
A crook's collar or belt
But his wife, of course, she felt a cop.

I don't want to post more on the wiki,
As Richard points out, it ain't sticky.
Anyone can go in
And change Vodka to Gin.
I don't want my lims touched by some sickie.

I bolded those wants to show you where to stress the line. Seriously, Richard made a great point in that other thread. Any one can go in and mess with our lims. I don't like the idea of that at all!

Hi, limerick-lovers!
Today I was investigating Slate Magazine's 'weekly poem' (pub. Tuesdays, ed. by Robert Pinsky) for the first time, & found to my delight a limericky curmudgeon who converts each weekly poem into a limerick!! Much as I love contemporary poetry, the irreverance is simply hilarious. Check it out.

Okay, TrossL. Perhaps the limerwiki idea was a bad one. Still, it has been a little fun...and I don't think Wordcrafters are the type to go in and change others' limericks.

Nice site, bethree! In the Chicago Tribune today they reported on a site, Bardball, where they write poems, limericks and haiku about the 2007 baseball season. The article started with what I thought was a rather lame poem. A. J. Pierzynski is a catcher for the Chicago White Sox, and he often finds himself in fights or altercations.

What Rhymes with Pierzynski?

Oh, it isn't easy
Being A.J. Pierzynski...
He's never mistaken
For Francis Assisi.
He'd start a rhubarb
In a game of Parchesi....
But to find a smart catcher
Ain't easy-peasy.

quote:

What Rhymes with Pierzynski?

"Dierzynski"?

I loved this article saying goodbye to the cicadas. After all my complaining, now I am going to miss them.

Farewell, sweet cicadas, we'll miss you.
I regret all the days I said, "Hiss, you!"
Your red bug-out eyes,
And your shrill, creepy cries
Just can't keep me from wanting to kiss you!

The magic number is 4...

(I have no idea how they figure that out, but it sounds good!)

The Cubs, who weren't winners of past,
Might get to the Series...at last!
Since 1908
To lose was their fate.
A big WIN, and we'd all have a blast!

Kalleh, let's speak with precision:
With the Cubs long the butt of derision,
To win the Word Serieous
Would make fans delerious;
But first, they must win their division.

Oh, Hic, I do hate that perspective!
Though, frankly, in being reflective,
I know you are right;
The predictions aren't bright.
And, yet, I am hardly objective!

This Kalleh's not much of a mystic;
She's always been too optimistic.
Today the Cubs lost;
I fear they'll be tossed.
This game can make Cubs's fans ballistic

She's more of a mystic than thought;
The playoffs the Cubs have now bought!
Chicago's ecstatic,
And not so pragmatic.
[Their chances may lead us to naught!]

SciFiJunkie is our brand new girl
Who's decided to give site a whirl.
So let's welcome her in
With good cheer and a grin
But no gin, 'cause that might make her hurl.