DLF Etiquette

[problemsolver]

Please please please....

Make your posts searchable. Many of us want to go back and read threads, especially about trades. We want to see what you got for TY Hilton in your rebuild. We want to see how much you paid to acquire Terry McLaurin. What Did it take to convince you to move back from 1.01 to 1.05? DLF is such a great site, but it has one major flaw. You cannot search for CEH or CMC or TY or AB or F1. You cannot search for 1.01. The DLF software will literally not allow for searches for those terms.

So please at least once in your posts refer to players by their full name, first and last. With some players with unique names perhaps just a first or last would be ok. But there are so many Browns in the league and its just a few extra keystrokes to type Antonio or Malcolm or Marquise.

If we also adopted a policy if referring to picks as pick16 (with no space) then draft picks woukd be searchable also. Its also more descriptive of where a pick actually lies (2.04 can mean very different things in a 10 team league and a 24 team league)


I will just go over here and hold my breath now

[McCafsteez]

Please please please....

Make your posts searchable. Many of us want to go back and read threads, especially about trades. We want to see what you got for TY Hilton in your rebuild. We want to see how much you paid to acquire Terry McLaurin. What Did it take to convince you to move back from 1.01 to 1.05? DLF is such a great site, but it has one major flaw. You cannot search for CEH or CMC or TY or AB or F1. You cannot search for 1.01. The DLF software will literally not allow for searches for those terms.

So please at least once in your posts refer to players by their full name, first and last. With some players with unique names perhaps just a first or last would be ok. But there are so many Browns in the league and its just a few extra keystrokes to type Antonio or Malcolm or Marquise.

If we also adopted a policy if referring to picks as pick16 (with no space) then draft picks woukd be searchable also. Its also more descriptive of where a pick actually lies (2.04 can mean very different things in a 10 team league and a 24 team league)


I will just go over here and hold my breath now

Excellent points here! I have never thought about this. Will be sure to keep this post in mind when creating my own posts.

[Pullo Vision]

With the exception of the “tuddy” comment, nothing I wrote even addresses formality vs. informality. I don’t have an issue with informal language. It’s all about correct vs. incorrect. For example, “coulda” is an informal, yet perfectly acceptable, way of saying/typing “could’ve,” whereas “could of” is just flat out wrong. Make sense?

So, I think I came with more high heat than I intended. Guess that's what happens when you throw around the term Nazi, lol.

I don't think I hit my point well enough, either. Language changes and formal words and structures whither away- like "thee", "thou", yada yada. While "alot" isn't accepted by spell checkers, it is an official word to me. I have to fix it each time, lol. At the least, the pronunciation itself is different.

Can't wait until American English gets Spaniglishized!

I get what you’re saying about how language changes. Hell, 30 years ago words like “email” and “sexting” didn’t exist, and 70-80 years ago, the word “gay” meant something very different than it does today. I understand and appreciate the fluidity of language, but I’m not sure I understand your point on “alot.” Every time I’ve seen that “word,” it was intended to mean what “a lot” means, except it was incorrectly typed as one word. That’s not informality. That’s just incorrect. Informality is typing “gonna” instead of “going to” or, to keep things more on topic, typing “TD” instead of “touchdown.”

And I, too, look forward to the continued Spanglishization of American English. There are already some words that I think in Spanish without even realizing I’m thinking in my non-native language. If you’re about to walk into a tree branch and bonk your head, I’m way more likely to shout “cuidado” than “look out” or “heads up.”

Nope, I understood. Word spelling and meaning change over time. I have to correct "e-mail" to "email" on some platforms. I think "alot" is a correct spelling as well- the meaning might be the same, but the pronunciation is certainly different from "a lot". That doesn't mean I think "a lot" is wrong.

[M-Dub]

(Note: in keeping with an etiquette suggestion from earlier in the thread, I’m refraining from quoting the previous post. Haha.)

Pullo,
I didn’t mean to imply that YOU don’t understand. I’m the one who clearly doesn’t understand. I’m over here trying to come up with how “alot” could possibly have a different pronunciation than “a lot,” and I’m coming up empty. I suppose the “a” could be pronounced two ways: either “a” (as in how the letter itself is pronounced) or more like an “uh” sound, but that’s not dependent on whether the phrase is spelled correctly as two words or incorrectly as one. That’s just dependent on how people speak. I think most people pronounce it as “uh lot” unless they’re emphasizing the phrase, but that really has nothing to do with how it’s spelled.

I do understand that spellings can change over time, but I guess I just think it should take more than one generation’s worth of kids not paying attention in English class to change the spelling of a phrase. Otherwise, we’re gonna have to start accepting “could of” and “should of” as correct as well.

BTW, I hope my posts aren’t coming off as contentious. I genuinely enjoy discussions like this as much as fantasy football discussions.

[FantasyFreak]

Another solid post.

This is really detailed. Are you guys related? Are you just a huge Stidham fan?

Neither. I’m just a guy who likes a healthy debate, and a healthy debate is one that brings up supporting evidence. I liked your rebuttal as it also had supporting evidence.

[Paul717]

Second:

- Quote properly so the conversation is easy to follow along.

People need to get better at deleting the parts of quotes they are not directly responding to. Nested quotes of multiple 200 word posts gets pretty unreadable especially on a phone. Would love it if everyone edited the quotes a little bit more.

Solid points. I never considered phone users so that was a little selfish of me. Keep only the relevant pieces of quotes, got it.

Now, if someone can explain how they cleverly reply to multiple quotes at once (or, multiple quote snippets), I'd be all set! But...explain it to me like I'm 5. Lol.

[Pullo Vision]

(Note: in keeping with an etiquette suggestion from earlier in the thread, I’m refraining from quoting the previous post. Haha.)

Pullo,
I didn’t mean to imply that YOU don’t understand. I’m the one who clearly doesn’t understand. I’m over here trying to come up with how “alot” could possibly have a different pronunciation than “a lot,” and I’m coming up empty. I suppose the “a” could be pronounced two ways: either “a” (as in how the letter itself is pronounced) or more like an “uh” sound, but that’s not dependent on whether the phrase is spelled correctly as two words or incorrectly as one. That’s just dependent on how people speak. I think most people pronounce it as “uh lot” unless they’re emphasizing the phrase, but that really has nothing to do with how it’s spelled.

I do understand that spellings can change over time, but I guess I just think it should take more than one generation’s worth of kids not paying attention in English class to change the spelling of a phrase. Otherwise, we’re gonna have to start accepting “could of” and “should of” as correct as well.

BTW, I hope my posts aren’t coming off as contentious. I genuinely enjoy discussions like this as much as fantasy football discussions.

Yeah, I was thinking the same, in the sense that "alot" sounds like "uh-lot" while "a lot" has that beat pause reflecting the space. Also think the "a" sound is more of a pointed "aa" sound rather than an "uh" sound. Also think "alot" has an emphasis on the 2nd syllable, like "uh-LOT". "A lot" sounds like either "a bunch" or "a parcel of land". There's that pause for the space after the "a".

Maybe the clue is that 2nd syllable emphasis, which comes off as a sort of "innumerable" or "a whole bunch"? How much do you like the prospects of juju/brady this year? Alot!

It'll be interesting if changes in common speech like "could of" or "coulda" is a permanent change in the language or more of an ephemeral change like slang terms that come and go.

I haven't taken your posts as contentious. If anything, I'm the one who came in (indirectly) tossing the Molotov cocktails. Well, I guess one, and realized the next post, lol. Definitely enjoy this kind of discussion- so interesting how languages change over time. The mass importation of French words into English during the Hundred Years War could be the blueprint for future changes into Spanglish.

[M-Dub]

It'll be interesting if changes in common speech like "could of" or "coulda" is a permanent change in the language or more of an ephemeral change like slang terms that come and go.

Eh, see I think this is where we fundamentally disagree. I view “could of” and “coulda” completely differently.

When people type “coulda,” they’re aware that the correct spelling is “could’ve,” but they’re intentionally typing it “incorrectly” in an attempt to more accurately portray an accent/dialect in spoken language. For example, Marlon Brando in On the Waterfront: “I coulda been a contendah! I coulda been somebody!” Typing it like that helps the reader internally hear it closer to the way it was delivered in the movie.

In contrast, when people type “could of,” they genuinely believe that’s how it’s supposed to be spelled because it’s very similar to how the correct spelling of “could’ve” sounds when you say it out loud.

The former is a genuine attempt to better represent spoken language on the page/screen. The latter is simply borne of ignorance. Enough people not knowing any better and not caring enough to learn isn’t a valid reason to change a word or phrase’s spelling or accept it as an alternate spelling, imo.

[dirkey]

Might I ask ... is a spelling / grammar lesson really on topic in a thread about etiquette?

We watch a sport where they literally make up words. "Winningest coach of all time." I dare say people using incorrect words isn't bad etiquette.

[RB6]

Alot is not a word. The end.

[Wizard]

Please please please....

Make your posts searchable. Many of us want to go back and read threads, especially about trades. We want to see what you got for TY Hilton in your rebuild. We want to see how much you paid to acquire Terry McLaurin. What Did it take to convince you to move back from 1.01 to 1.05? DLF is such a great site, but it has one major flaw. You cannot search for CEH or CMC or TY or AB or F1. You cannot search for 1.01. The DLF software will literally not allow for searches for those terms.

So please at least once in your posts refer to players by their full name, first and last. With some players with unique names perhaps just a first or last would be ok. But there are so many Browns in the league and its just a few extra keystrokes to type Antonio or Malcolm or Marquise.

If we also adopted a policy if referring to picks as pick16 (with no space) then draft picks woukd be searchable also. Its also more descriptive of where a pick actually lies (2.04 can mean very different things in a 10 team league and a 24 team league)


I will just go over here and hold my breath now

Excellent points here! I have never thought about this. Will be sure to keep this post in mind when creating my own posts.

Amen! I'd like to see all abbreviations of names include the players last name every time. I can't tell you how many times I'm reading a post and a 2 or 3 letter abbreviation comes up for a player's name and I either can't figure out who it is or pick the wrong player that fits the abbreviation. I've also run into where you can't search on an abbreviation many times.

[M-Dub]

Might I ask ... is a spelling / grammar lesson really on topic in a thread about etiquette?

We watch a sport where they literally make up words. "Winningest coach of all time." I dare say people using incorrect words isn't bad etiquette.

I strongly disagree. Using incorrect spelling/grammar indicates that the speaker/keyboardist doesn’t care enough about the topic at hand and/or the other people involved in the discussion to even communicate coherently. That’s the epitome of poor etiquette, imo.

“Winningest” specifically doesn’t really bother me. It’s been in use since at least the 1940s. What I find particularly irksome in sports broadcasting is the all-too-frequent use of “mano a mano” where the speaker obviously thinks it means “man to man.”

[Hottoddies]

What I find particularly irksome in sports broadcasting is the all-too-frequent use of “mano a mano” where the speaker obviously thinks it means “man to man.”

It's actually Spanish for "hand to hand" It is used to mean that two people are pitted in competition with each other. So in this sense, sports broadcasters are not misusing the phrase.

[Hottoddies]

What I find particularly irksome in sports broadcasting is the all-too-frequent use of “mano a mano” where the speaker obviously thinks it means “man to man.”

It's actually Spanish for "hand to hand" It is used to mean that two people are pitted in competition with each other. So in this sense, sports broadcasters are not misusing the phrase.

Now if you were to say, "I going to have a talk with my son, mano a mano, about the birds and the bees", this would certainly be a misuse of the phrase. Unless, of course, it was expected to lead to a fight.

[OhCruelestRanter]