Barbarisms  like "u" and "ur" are neither misspellings nor bad grammar. They are deliberate usage choices.

---

Shorthand. Pretty much everyone uses it to save room for more characters.

Much like the usage of the 1337 $[]D34|<**

**:Ok, not for the same reasons.. it's a cultural/generational thing.

---

She is over 21 and single, she just hasn't gotten past fourth grade :P

I mean that completely in good fun, drivel. The age of technology has evolved into RAPID information. Humans always want to do things faster, faster, faster... More than they want to do things better better better.

Back on the subject though, you'd better perform better, Grant. Notice how Cedrick Benson was falling forward, rather than falling backwards onto his ass whenever he ran into someone? A yard or two here or there tends to add up... As does holding onto the football.

All in all... Don't like the idea of players twittering. Could result in some pretty bad PR situations. If I were GM, I'd let my players twitter, but there would be a three strikes and you're out rule... Have to be professional and careful about what you say if you're a player. Don't be professional and start causing drama? You lose your privilege.

On one hand, I'm happy they're so mad..Shows how much they care. On the other hand, some of the snide comments are a little off putting.

---

For the players-If you are going to "tweet", you can't pick and choose. When you get your butt handed to you on the field, what do you expect fans to do? Pat you on the back? Say "It's ok!"

Like Ironman said.......he paid out ALOT of money to come to the game, as did MANY fans. And to see a lackluster performance in all areas of the game by your team is unacceptable.

You get paid more for playing ONE GAME then most fans make working their asses off for several years.
So fans have a RIGHT to be mad AND to take you to the woodshed when it's deserved.......and yesterday's game? IT WAS DESERVED.

---

"Brevity is the soul of wit," etc. In contrast to my screen name, I am a big believer in conciseness, which is one of the reasons why my average post is quite short. My continual quest as a writer is to say as much as possible in the fewest words possible. Creativity emerges not in the absence of boundaries, but in the presence of constraints. That is why poetic forms like the sonnet were so popular for so many years: they challenged writers to come up with non-trite turns of phrase in a strict format. "Free verse," as Robert Frost liked to say, "is like playing tennis with the net down." So if one desires to use a constrained medium like Twitter to hone one's craft, more power to them -- and for that it could have great value. But there is only value if the writer uses that opportunity to purge all the dross from his words. The problem with Tweeters is they not only fail to do that, they do just the opposite. Twitter thus becomes a platform for unrefined banality.



I don't deny this. I'm one of those geeky college students who actually seeks out old sources for his papers: masters theses from the 1920s and the like. As I've read papers from various eras, I've noticed that editorial standards have increased significantly in the past hundred years or so -- and rightfully so. In the era of manual typewriters, a single mistake on a key could set you back a page -- or several, depending on the layout of the page. Today it's a matter of correcting a mistake on a screen. Even more the point, all word processors and major internet browsers have built-in spell checkers. When people write things these days, their screens must be riddled with squiggly red lines that they simply ignore.

So yes, I feel justified in holding this generation to a higher standard.

I will say this: There are some people on this very forum who should probably feel at least a little humbled that a guy like Rockmolder, after a little more than a year, knows more about football and writes better English than they do after an entire lifetime. I know I often feel stupid next to him, anyway, and I'm not a (very) dumb guy.

---

After seing this thread I am interested in actually following the players
tweets. Does anyone have the definitive list of verified Packers twitter pages?

Thanks
DJ

---

scorz is short for scores. saving a character whenever possible especially if you have a lot to say.

---

cheesey, I agree that fans pay a lot and deserve a lot.

On the other hand, I think we can only expect 100% of their efforts. It is an athletic endeavor where two are competing against each other.

Some days, no matter how you prepare, you don't play well.

If you paid to watch tiger a few years ago at the British Open when he shot 81 would you talk about how bad he sucks and send him twitters to the same effect or would you write it off as he just had a bad day?

I think, just as on this forum, you should only tweet what you would say to the other person in person.

I don't blame Barnett for upset with personal attack on twitter. Expect it? yes. Still doesn't change it is in poor taste and no one has that right.

---

Well the insight from players is mildly interesting, I think this is a good move by Barnett.

Additionally... I respect the amount of effort that Nick has put into rehabbing and getting ready to go.

But for him to act like he is the only player that has worked his ass off and that he doesn't understand the rotation thing... well it is simple. You got your ass handed to you in the running game.. my 5th grade son fights off a block better than a few attempts from Barnett yesterday..

Bishop may make mistakes here and there, but the kid knocks people around inside the box and disrupts things.. freaking disappointed they didn't put him in there to try to help stop the bleeding on the run defense.

But seeing the 'tude of Barnett.. apparently we see that some politics are still in play in Green Bay.

---