203
Supreme Court won’t hear InfoWars host’s First Amendment challenge to Jan. 6 conviction
(www.politico.com)
this post was submitted on 04 Jun 2024
203 points (99.0% liked)
politics
19097 readers
3113 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This is one of those things where you think you're making a justified complaint about a publication using unnecessarily esoteric language that you feel alienates the reader. This is something that has the possibility of being a legitimate complaint. There is a good argument for not talking over your audience's heads.
But everyone who read the article just sees a guy who can't read...
My partner is English as second language and I never dumb down anything I say to her. She asks me the words she doesn't know and I explain them as best I can or we look them up on my phone when I'm not certain I can articulate the meaning accurately enough to provide a good example. I think reducing the vocab that I use with her vs english-native friends and family would be insulting to her. Same as how I wouldn't dumb it down speaking to a 10yo (it's different for toddlers and those not much older, obviously).
I'm educated well enough, I was mostly being sarcastic but the fact is that no one uses that word. I figured what it meant based on context but still had to go look it up and was annoyed. Sometimes it seems like a writer feels like being vague and beats you over the head with a thesaurus.
When I write I use the right word that says what I want to say/get across. To pick a word that is less clear because it’s more common is infact doing to opposite of your complaint. It’s annoying to me you can’t expand your lexicon instead of have to “dumb” it down for people like you.
You can be as high and mighty as you want but you won't find a wide audience without relaxing your lexicon and writing with prose. In translation, you've got to dumb it down because most people are dumb. We see a big and/or uncommon word and give up on the entire piece, I hate to break it to you but that's just the way it is.
There are two types of people. Those who get excited when they see a word they don't know and those who get annoyed.
Damn right! I have to look up any word I don't know out a compulsive need to ensure that I fully understand what I've read. It's a beneficial OCDish trait, unlike some of the other ones.
This is the opposite of vague
When was the last time you used the word exhort in a sentence? Or heard it? The word has a specific meaning sure but using uncommon vernacular makes the sentence vague.
If the sentence is hard to understand because the writer omitted important context, we can say that the sentence is vague.
If the sentence is hard to understand because the reader can't read at a sixth grade reading level, we can say that the reader is stupid.
Exhort isn't an advanced word. It's intermediate vocabulary that you managed to go without your entire life until today. You could act like an adult with a functioning brain and simply look up the word you don't know and add it to your personal vocabulary so that you won't be confused by it again. Instead, you have decided to throw a tantrum about having to face a single word you didn't already know.
Honestly, I don't know how you are making the arguments are you without feeling completely humiliated. Most people just quietly educate themselves when they catch themselves unaware of a common English word. It's wild to broadcast to the whole world that you didn't know the word "exhort", and then double down even after it is apparent that you are the only one who didn't already know that word.
Nobody here is siding with you on this, because nobody else sees the problem you do. That's not a good sign when everyone reads the same article you did, and you're the only one insisting that the article was unreadable. You're just revealing that, out of everyone who read the article, you're the worst at reading.
Literally how does it make the sentence vague? I don't want to be rude but do you not know what vague means either?