WarpMyMind

I've seen several times here people reply a message with a simple Wow !

Not a single word.
Not a further comment.
Not a single thought.

What does exactly mean ?
Are they marvelled at the genious of the previous post ?
Are they speechless enough to not post an other sentence ?
Or do they want to access another level, to gain another star under their pseudo ?

That was my friday post fellas.

Wow. :wink:

Seriously though, it might be that most people don't know what else to say. Happens to me all the time. Glad you found this message though.

CWolfCW wrote:Wow. :wink:

Well, at last, I didn't have to wait too long for an answer !

Uh... wow, that was a very good point. :wink:


Can't wait for your Monday post...

johnbohnrevenge wrote:Uh... wow, that was a very good point. :wink:

Can't wait for your Monday post...

GAYTTO, you have received replies from two people. The first is an Anglo-Canadian. The second is an Australian. I don't know the first. I have known the second for some time and I like him; he normally shows more maturity.

As to the first. A student who has made eight posts. In three of these posts, he wanted some free information and/or something for free. These three contain more words and more lucidity. Following are the portions of the other five that were actually written by the person in question:

"Not sure if this has been posted before but it is certainly interesting to watch: ... What a great way to mess with somebody, eh? / Now I'm tempted to go find copies of his show. / Ah, all the DVDs are Region 2. I'm too lazy to have to break down the region encryption. / Same. / Wow."

In terms of his normal literary output, GAYTTO, at least you weren't short-changed in either quality or quantity. But it's his lucky day. I have a cousin that works for his ISP and another who works in administration/management of the Greater Toronto schools.

His reply was meant to be sarcastic and cute. It's the sort of response that one quickly identifies as having come from a 15-17 year-old whose judgment has not yet caught up with his hormones. We had two 16-year-olds who fit the pattern exactly. Nous avIons.

In answer to your question, which is actually quite good. "Wow" is an informal interjection that normally expresses positive surprise. If an Olympic diver receives a perfect score, an English speaker might say "Wow." On the other hand, someone not given to original thinking might see pictures of corpses in New Orleans and say "Wow." I have a Harrap's and a LaRousse. They define "wow" as "succès fou" and "sensationnel."

Unfortunately, the dictionary definitions do not match the tone of the responses you received.
.

Mmm... you may want to check my post more carefully before you assume I had only written "Wow."

I don't know why you are being so hostile towards me though. Have I offended you in some way?

CWolfCW wrote:Mmm... you may want to check my post more carefully before you assume I had only written "Wow."

I don't know why you are being so hostile towards me though. Have I offended you in some way?

Hi, CWolfCW,

The second paragraph of your post came through incredibly small, at least on my screen. I know I missed it completely the first time around.

Anyone else seeing it this small, too?

morrcomm wrote:

CWolfCW wrote:Mmm... you may want to check my post more carefully before you assume I had only written "Wow."

I don't know why you are being so hostile towards me though. Have I offended you in some way?

Hi, CWolfCW,

The second paragraph of your post came through incredibly small, at least on my screen. I know I missed it completely the first time around.

Anyone else seeing it this small, too?

Yeah, I had set the text colour to white and set the font size to one. The reason was to keep the impression of a joke while actually posting my own reply.

CWolfCW wrote:Mmm... you may want to check my post more carefully before you assume I had only written "Wow."

I don't know why you are being so hostile towards me though. Have I offended you in some way?

I noted that your answer was cute. Indeed it was.

Xalliinii a'tiik jawaab illak bi hathi al-lugha. Tastafiid minno? Belki, size bu cevap.

An answer given is an answer seen and understood. I find offensive your readily visible answer to a non-native speaker, who asked an honest question. The cute addition exacerbates the problem. Why? You gave the entire answer considerable thought.

For future reference, listing "student" by itself is sometimes unhelpful. You will find out what that means.

CWolfCW wrote:

morrcomm wrote:

CWolfCW wrote:Mmm... you may want to check my post more carefully before you assume I had only written "Wow."

I don't know why you are being so hostile towards me though. Have I offended you in some way?

Hi, CWolfCW,

The second paragraph of your post came through incredibly small, at least on my screen. I know I missed it completely the first time around.

Anyone else seeing it this small, too?

Yeah, I had set the text colour to white and set the font size to one. The reason was to keep the impression of a joke while actually posting my own reply.

Here we go again; apologies, apologies.
I think I spend most of my time here posting more apologies than real posts.

CWolfCW, here is my explanation : in your original post, the second paragraph wasn't visible. It only appeared when I quoted it. I supposed you made a private joke and I took it like that and I didn't reproduce it in the quotation.

You see, nothing to be paranoid about.

I don't want to be hostile in any way (shape or form). You can believe me.

I'm a french speaker and maybe I have some difficulty to find the right word to share my thoughts. I don't take any excuses from that. I am simply less subtle in english.

Any further complaints (there will be ! there will be !) can be sent directly to me as a private message. I won't be offended at all and I won't bite anyone.

CWolfCW wrote:Mmm... you may want to check my post more carefully before you assume I had only written "Wow."

I don't know why you are being so hostile towards me though. Have I offended you in some way?

It's just his way of trying to look smart. I don't think he realises that no matter how much text he puts in his answer he doesn't. I mean, how many asides do you need to give before you actually have any content. It seems as if you need to write a short story just to make even the smallest of points.

I like to put paragraphs into my posts too. It is because everyone who does this automatically looks like they have something to say, regardless of if they have something to say or not.

That reminds me of something someone once said 'Better to have died fighting than to die standing still'. I think this has relevance some how because someone said it once. I also like to to quote people for no particular reason.

This is taking me a very long time to type all this up. Maybe I could get to a point sooner or later. Maybe.

.
Welcome back, Mike, after your absence! I'm glad to see you. Also relieved that it's the same you that we all know.

For everybody's benefit, I think I'm the evil tool that uses paragraphs. :)

I'd like to keep to the thread today. Which is..... WOW!

Studies show that the effects of television, including even Sesame Street, action thrillers with quick frame-changes while Son of Sylvester says "Duh", schools that don't teach but try to entertain....these and additional factors are all contributing to ever shorter attention spans.

Sometimes, it takes others to see us properly. That was true in this thread. North American-'Roo-Kiwi-Comp state schools are among the most expensive in the world, and the quality of the education is declining. Sadly enough, the results show.

"WOW." Along with a note that says, "Sometimes I use this when I can't think of anything else to say"--or words to that effect. Indeed so.

Attention spans. Can't think. Ever shorter. Ever harder. Ego bruises. Emotional compensation.

You see where we're headed. From WOW we first move to WO.

And from there--
Do you solemnly swear........ "No, the right hand!"

We get

W!

Has that scared anyone into trying to concentrate for longer periods? :P

- - - - -

Somewhat different topic. I have a genuine, Australian history question. About the mid-1970s, the Prime Minister was a Labourite named Gough Whitlam. The Governor-General of Australia, appointed by the Queen, held a post that had become largely ceremonial. Nonetheless, it had a set of formally retained powers that were rarely...in fact, never...used. The G-G wore a perfectly pressed red jacket, looked decorative, and drank UK gin and UK scotch. (One could do worse.)

Then things changed. Suddenly. One day the Governor-General dusted off those old and nearly forgotten powers. He signed a document in the name of Queen Elizabeth II, and he fired the Prime Minister. It made no difference that Whitlam headed a duly constituted government. He was sacked. He was gone. The G-G didn't do that on his own. The Queen didn't make the actual decision, either. The UK prime minister presumably made the decision, possibly in consultation with the Defence Ministries and the intelligence services in both countries, and along with reliable and responsible Australians. If desperate acts require desperate measures; then surely desperate measures suggest prior desperate acts.

Question: What had Gough Whitlam done .... really done .... that he was fired by the Queen on the advice of the British prime minister?

I have never read the genuine cause of the sacking. Does anybody know the real details? It may be that they are complex and will require some thought and organization, but I can tell you the results of that effort:

WOW. A useful time to use the word.
.