You can also notice they all have BLUE eyes, are invincible, have two or more "love interests" (and the "main one" ironically almost always having the same hair style as one and other), spiky hair no one can achieve, have a "belt" focus, weapons way too big for the job and have some of the most 2-D/low-profile supporting female characters on the face of the planet (who also happen to be the "main love interest" and must be saved at one point or another for some lame reason). Cloud: Aerith/Tifa - Aerith dies, Tifa needs to be at least saved from Loz. (My memory on FF7 is extremely fuzzy.) Squall/Leon: Rinoa/Quistis - Rinoa gets captured more times then I care to count, so does Quistis, Rinoa also happens to be one of the most annoying stereotypes of a girl in all of history (in my humble opinion). Tidus: Yuna/Rikku/Lulu (you can pick one but the main focus IS Yuna) - Yuna gets captured and has about as much personality as her summon staff, Rikku is one of the few likable characters created, she has pep and enough will to power the Machina of Spira, Lulu has about as much emotional depth as that is as practical as her clothing, if you're going to be a guardian, a helpful hint would be to wear clothing that IS clothing not a collection of BELTS strung together to look like clothing. Sora: Kairi/Namine - I don't -care- if Namine is Kairi's Nobody, Namine is a freaking -improvement- in the personality department. Both were captured, Kairi's "hostage status" being more numerable of the two. Namine actually does a good job of being actually treated as if she was in the care of villains unlike Kairi, so I actually like Namine enough to say she is a likable character. PS: Disney is not too kiddy to explain death, look at Ansem the Wise. And that fade into Darkness business is probably how death works in their world. Look at every boss and enemy and "normal people" they disappear, kinda like the OTHER enemies and bosses in the OTHER FF games.
Oh I perfectly understand this, but even the Daisy's SHADOW (coughNaminecough) behaved in as uncooperative manner as possible, Kairi just stood there the 3rd time around, (1st was understandable, 2nd she ran, but 3rd she just stood there). I'm not expecting a brawler out of her at all anymore, but common sense is the least she could supply. Counter-point summed up, Nomura, DESIGN. Not Disney, Disney did NOT create Kairi, NOMURA DID, he could have made her a Rikku/Yuffie character (a peppy, creative, sneaky-but-well-meaning type) and she probably still would have been captured. Also, Belle showed some kick, Ariel fought alongside you just as Mulan could. And Ariel WAS a princess mind you. ]8
Kairi happens to be a princess of light (course everyone might be...), wield a keyblade (then again I guess everyone does...), her Nobody can manipulate the memories of Sora (or maybe just about everyone can do that), she came from HB/RG as a refugee (then again there were a lot of those) and when she gets captured she gets treated like a piece of fine china (maybe some villains have a good hostage code?). She also had half a year to do something, even Selphie (a character just there for cameos) knows a form of self-defense, Kairi runs at best or just...stands there, you can still be normal and know the basics of "if some man tries to grab you, you kick and scream." She is more than allowed to be weak, but not knowing the basics of self-preservation in that regard is a very lame reason for "normalcy," I dare say it travels close to "idiocy" in her case, had Axel been brandishing a weapon and she came quietly it would make more sense, but rather he just waltzed up to her. Even her Nobody showed more spunk with at least indicating she wasn't going to go quietly the 2nd time around. I'm not expecting a dark past or as much of a character rough path as say, Riku or even the slight one Sora went through and then promptly forgot or anything, but for such a potentially "good character" she could be, it is not very well shown. It also doesn't help that when she is run through certain parameters, she comes very close to being a Sue, as when she is shown in a scene it's like it's doing its best to show how NOT NORMAL she is. Also consider the people in Twilight Town, they're all quite normal and have much better personalities then her, ironically Olette came off as being a fragment of Kairi minus Kairi's Sue status, I liked Olette much better, who is an example of a TRUE normal person in the KHverse. But I won't stop you from liking Kairi, I'm merely curious as to how people can like her aside from reasons of "niceness", "prettiness" and "she looks good with Sora." I know Kairi is necessary, but this doesn't excuse her for being executed (in my opinon) rather poorly.
Speaking of her coming from Hollow Bastion/Radiant Garden, I believe she was gipped of something in character design...think very hard if you have to about what I mean by that, specifically the residents of HB/RG...like the apprentices, some of the people who reside there and defend it and then look at Kairi who can't really fight or at least toss potions to people. I think that's some serious gipping there..... :\ Still not an excuse to like her though. (for me anyway) Being a love interest of the main character does nothing to redeem her either....
Ok you're free to disagree. Maybe, but one instance in three whole games, even if it is indirect, is not justification of the character (for your example). Namine helped Riku, not Kairi, hence why it's odd to give character points to something as indirect as that. It's like saying Oathkeeper is what destroyed Xehanort's Heartless/Xemnas (while possible is not always true, it's which ever you use for the final battle, or the Kingdom Key by default.) Also it is far from justification that Kairi is a good character, we don't directly see much of her "support" except indirectly as per what Riku and/or Sora might say (and maybe her single comments about "I know you can do it" which just about every other good character says anyway). And as much as I love their side-mentioning of it, I would rather see another way of showing this applied from her character rather than from other characters describing it. Yes she is nice but it's empty when it describes her, does that make sense? She's a little TOO back-row to really be a solid "main" character.
KH1's castle seemed much better because it seemed much larger, in KH2 is seems that Hollow Bastion is about a third the size of the castle from KH1, I also miss the puzzles as they were something to accomplish unlike the surplus of stupid mini-games in KH2.
What I find most odd about this statement is that Kairi is incredibly helpless for a girl who apparently depicts the rest of the female populous of the world. And I assure you sir that once someone gets captured once, they do their damn best to make sure they don't get kidnapped again. Unlike a certain....redheaded girl. How is she awesome out of curiosity?
I think it's funny you say this, as Nomura created the characters and you can even compare them to the Disney ones that appear. Also, I assure you the main production team is Square not Disney. (Look at the credits) Belle, Mulan and Alice. Belle jabbed Xaldin and knows self-defense! Mulan is a warior (well was a better one in her Disney movie, yeah I know she isn't a Disney princess but still.) Alice....just....she was a princess and she showed more kick than Kairi. Also Kairi is a Mary Sue, not a Disney Princess (Nomura spawned her).
I dislike Kairi because as someone who is said to be an "equal part" of their trinity of friendship but she comes off as a leech, Riku got put through the character growth hell-hole (and is one of the most developed characters because of this) and Sora is Mr. Airheaded-Optimistic-Hyper-Hero-Go (in the very least he is so goody-goody and brimming with happiness and good-spirit it annoys people who wanted an emo-broody hero, I won't lie but that somewhat is what makes him Sora and likeable). She also has terrible character development and is hampered by Nomura's design (or lack thereof) to even be considered a good character much less a real character at all. I get better vibes from Aqua and I've only seen teaser clips for her if that helps the comparison. But in current-game comparison, if I were to pick between Namine and Kairi for character and character roles ironically, I would, without a doubt, pick Namine who between the two of them, has more character than Kairi can possibly make up for in two games. (To be fair they both got two games, but between the two, Namine had more development or at more character to her.) Kairi is 'pretty' but that's about it, she doesn't seem to serve much other purpose despite what other people *coughKairifanscough* speculate. The sad thing is that if Kairi wasn't Sora and Riku's good friend (the reasoning for this eluding me....) but rather one of the OTHER princesses of heart, she would have been rescued about the same. Sora would still be obligated to save her because of her OVERWHELMING LIGHT and Riku would still have had to find her because of her OVERWHELMING LIGHT even if neither knew her. And that part of her being that kind of Sue character is damn unsettling. What's even sadder is that I find (decent or good) fanfic writer's development and depiction of Kairi much more likable than the person who created her (Nomura). I know he has a loop-hole clause going but I find it ever amusing that the depictions of Kairi are usually rather different when compared to depictions of Sora and Riku.
It would be lovely if he clarified these things, but then again, I'm not expecting any mindblowing revelations from 358/2. The KH Novels are no more canon than the manga , or shall we consider those canon too despite some of the differences between the two. Unless Nomura happens to be the author of the novels- is he? If he is I retract the statement of it not being canon, if he is NOT the author of the novels then no, it is not canon at all. Given the wondering of how their Nobodies can exist and then their Heartless are not special (or very powerful) at all (if you pull the "well the naturals are limited" I tell you to refer back to KH1's inventory of Heartless as well as the scant couple in KH2), it's a wonder if Axel's Heartless has even been met or liberated yet. (At least on Sora's side) Out of curiosity Why is there a spelling error in something you quoted? Where did you get the rest of the report from? And yes I did ask for a link thank you. As for that Xehanort/Ansem comment, you needn't tell me something so obvious about the main "villain", and I want you to think about how SPECIAL he was and how much time will elapse before he is possibly/theoretically fought again, especially with the Terra = Xehanort theories flying about (also I wouldn't be at all surprised if Nomura does the "three parts make up a person" and we end up fighting the 3rd part of Xehanort that his floating around). He also happens to be the MAIN ANTAGONIST, Axel was a side-character at best. Does the fact Axel technically suicided make a difference? Xemnas/Xehanort's Heartless were both 'killed' by the keyblade, consider that in your equation as well. Actually, if their Nobodies only need to be "defeated" consider the 3 apprentices that were killed in Castle Oblivion (Lexaeus, Vexen and Zexion) that did NOT RETURN to Hollow Bastion/Radiant Garden, they got half a year to return after their Nobodies were killed, so why didn't they? Even if the "by chance" rule is true, at least one of them should have returned and they did not, hence why I heavily doubt Axel is still alive. However for Xehanort/Xemnas, refer to what I said earlier about him being special because of his antagonist privileges.
For the first part I have no idea if you are agreeing with me guessing his age or suggesting lowering the bar for his theoretical age, whichever, he APPEARS to be in his early 20s and age-wise it seems the most safe bet in my opinion. Also consider the person who does the voice, I assure you that they are not in their early 20s yet still voice characters who may be younger than they are. As for that last comment, I kindly request proof that both are still alive (actually either) in the future, preferably from Nomura's mouth (a link to the article as well). Just because he was content does not make dissolving into thin air any less not-gone, also consider the Organization's "tomb room." Roxas's was the only one lit, he is a Nobody and he is still 'alive' therefore his tombstone was still blue, and Xemnas's which is missing would also be blue as he had not been defeated yet, everyone else's however were RED, and as you killed them they would turn from blue (alive) to red (dead). Axel's was red, as were ten others by the time you "clear" the room.
Kiwise appears to be hellbent on the idea that Ienzo was possibly 7 or 8 years old when he was apprenticed. However this seems flawed in given his Nobody's appearance he seems to be in his early twenties. Also considering the other apprentices ages, anything below late 20s early 30s would be considered "the youngest of them all". (Zexion also has a lower pitched voice which suggests he has already gone through the magic known as puberty.) Anyway, I believe Nobody's are incapable of aging just as they do not seem to require many other things to really "survive". They have no need for sleep, food, water or many other necessities, so why would they age? Also I believe Xemnas may have hinted at how Nobodies do not age with his "We must be eternal" something to that ilk, he wouldn't say it if he could observe his fellow Nobodies aging. I know someone will argue "but he didn't mean it in that context" to those I ask, why else would he say it? He doesn't lie, he doesn't need to. And as Repliku said, Xemnas doesn't seem to have aged at all. Namine and Roxas are exceptions because their counterparts are still alive as well as other variables, Namine is their "pure Nobody" and Roxas is probably some fragment of Ven. I also think it's funny that people are pointing out the differences between Xemnas, his Heartless and Xehanort concerning age, they have tweaked hair color, skin color and some other minor tweaks, as someone said, because their Nobody halves are just made up of their own memories, that probably has something to do with how they appear. Personally I would like to see the Original Six and their selves. PS: There isn't really anything to gain out of this discussion as all of the human Nobodies (as far as we know) are all dead, therefore even if they could age it wouldn't matter as they are fully destroyed at this point in time. (lol)
Cars? Sora can FLY/GLIDE, he just needs a high cliff to get a good start. And cell phones, oh those silly teenagers!
Description Time! 1. Xemnas - he was the leader after all and though the threat of "being turned into a Dusk" was never really confirmed, I wouldn't be surprised if he was behind the engineering of the most "specialized" Minor Nobodies or at least had the power to do so. He was also able to technically somehow create a fake Kingdom Hearts and if that isn't power in that universe, I don't know what is. 2. Marluxia - he is easily one of the most deadly if he wasn't so busy trying to be graceful/play around. He had a countdown attack where if you did not have your magical triangle command, enough levels or dodge skill, Sora would be toast in a set number of hits (regardless of damage, and that is what I think is a very powerful skill). as well as his own personal Nobody to do his bidding (Specter) and do it's own doom counter. (I wonder why it was not included in his FM+ counterpart?) I also have trouble seeing how his element is Nature aside from the petals that appear as his distance attacks are mixed with a good measure of darkness. Also Nature does not equate to a countdown timer of doom, that would be the element of Death. However if we were to go with the CoM only version, he would still hold his ranking as he got to control his own castle, Specter and could make a fairly decent replica of himself to fight Sora. 3. Luxord - despite using cards he ranks up with Marluxia in my opinion given he has a quantity battle. (Time vs Time) He could easily have killed Sora with his Time element but didn't, but then again that would go against his personality to just outright "cheat". (Ironic given he has manners for battle but lacks morals in the other departments...) 4. Xigbar - almost identical to Luxord in that he didn't use his element properly and that he, for some outlandish reason, needed to reload his guns frequently (despite having control over basic laws of physics) and the strange flux it has depending on what bullet he shoots. (The big shot makes sense, but the red vs blue bullet capacity does not.) 5. Larxene - she was able to backhand and take down Repliku in one hit for whatever reason, and for whatever other reason she couldn't do this when she had to fight Sora...then again it could easily be the "she's the sadist she wants her fun to last" approach which would toss her up into the ranks of Marluxia and Luxord if this power was held constant from cutscene to battle. 6. Lexaeus - he has a huge tomahawk as well at the ability to power up. It is made a point that in brute strength he would be in the higher tier however his speed is his only real drawback. 7. Xaldin - he has six lances, one of them is bound to hit something. He gets a lower ranking however because he was disarmed by a mere jab to the gut in a cutscene. (Yet strangely enough does not flinch in battle, go figure.) 8. Saix - once again a heavy hitter but I have to consider how much of it is reliant on the "moon's" power. Regardless when he hits it leaves marks for sure. 9. Demyx - even though he has the power of water if he could barrage his opponents with even more water he could kill them easily. The problem lies in his ability to string them together as well as put more power behind them, and that is why he is low but still higher than some of the others. (I also never quite got the "you must kill the clones in X amount of time or you get auto-killed, but I guess it must be some sort of instant kill attack, so he gets benefit of the doubt for that.) 10. Axel - he is quite resilient and recurring, I think that deserves some merit in on itself, however his attacks see-saw in terms of actual power. He also happens to serve as a tutorial battle and lose "badly" if that makes any sense. 11. Vexen - poor poor scientist. He's caught between being weak or not being 'smart enough to use his power correctly' and since he is supposed to be one of the smartest out of the Organization I am left with the speculation he was simply not as strong. However this is dependent on the point of view of the player really...but then again he was combusted by Axel with a mere finger snap, weakened or not that's not a great display of power considering he has a shield and the forethought to have an auto-life (resurrect) skill. 12. Roxas - Despite what Nomura says I believe Roxas to be in the lower half of the strength totem pole. He seems to lack the emotional control/backing to really utilize his full strength. He was also killed via cutscene in the original KH2 which bottoms out his strength in my opinion. 13. Zexion - his battle style relies too much on the chessboard existing rather than having it busted up by a weapon. He is also a bit too much on the naive side to fully use his power to its fullest and most devastating extent. In a way his battle style could almost be considered the same as a turtle or a magic trick, once you surprise him he's helpless or once you know the method it loses its power. Had he had the personality or same control as Xemnas or even Luxord or Marluxia he wouldn't be so low on the power scale. He was also killed via cutscene in the original so this also hampers his power rating.
-Nomura needs to grow better female character development and design. -The obnoxious amounts of MINI-GAMES I don't give a damn about (KH2). -Less involvement with the Disney worlds in KH2. -World SHRINKAGE -seriously Hollow Bastion SHRUNK when they took it over- -Balanced Challenge (not just a mere damage tweak for "harder" game-play I want bosses that threaten my playing experience in terms of strategy or some such nonsense). -Kairi to either grow some character, stop being a Mary Sue or just STAY THE HELL OUT OF THE WAY (come on even SELPHIE can fight and Selphie is there for 4 seconds!) -Not to take so damn long to come over, almost everyone likes the Japanese voices over the English Voices, NO LOSS IF THEY JUST PROVIDE SUBS. (This is where they lose the most time, while admirable FOR LIP SYNCING, GOOD LORD) -KEEP THEIR PROMISES.
Did you watch FF7:AC the fight is nearly identical in terms of actions (and much lower resolution graphics), minus a wounded Kadaj at the end. So no, everyone's precious Sephiroth was not marred in KH translation, he just got more wings!
I think it is quite amusing that you automatically assume I am angry, and I find your Caps vs. bold statement also amusing, if it makes you feel better I will go back and re-bold my short bursts of Caps letters, actually on second thought in a formal conversation I would have still "shouted" those words, because my silent text perhaps isn't conveying the meaning. Also this is a debate corner where one has to be thorough in their points, if they aren't their points will then collapse. Also for your sake I have looked up the meaning of contraction: I will also restate that dep't/dept. for department is an acknowledged contraction, "lik" from "like" is not (formally recognized anyway as a sign of proper wording). As for your 244 characters statement, you could just as easily use a phone to speak verbally and even then 244 is more than enough space to get your main point across...if not, why aren't you using your phone's primary function? Also, in the movie theater? You could do the more socially connected option and....perhaps call the friend, or if you are meeting them, wait outside the theater. But then again that is a personal preference, you can go sit inside the theater if that is your personal choice. Also, one must write/type it for it to be read whereas the 'sound' would technically be immediate in that you talk as one hears (if you have no signal you wouldn't be able to send the text anyway). Also judgment is just that, if the person who texts you broken phrases but later proves to be quite intelligent otherwise you will assume laziness. But if that person always texts in broken phrases and speaks in broken phrases, the "lack of a better grasp on English" is only enforced. There is a difference between bad judgment, hasty judgment and correct judgment, it all depends on the individual. Where can I find the 'n00b' definition (as in an actually credited source) as you have so eloquently stated as that being the meaning? As far as I have heard it 'n00b' has the same meaning as newbie save for different spellings and the phonetic difference when spoken. Back on topic, I still will take the more articulate sentence over the text chat. I will also probably trust the more articulate sentence over the text chat 99.9% of the time. Full sentences with full words are serious business. ]8<<
(If that one hurt your brain, here's some more reading pain. Please try to read more carefully this time.) Given that this is a debate forum speed-reading might not be the best way to go about when attempting to rebut or otherwise "call someone" on their point of view. That being said and to address your question, why yes using minced words does make someone seem stupid, or at least from my perspective (and it doesn't help whatever impression they were trying to make if they were text chatting on purpose). And "life-and-death" thing a bit too harsh? If you read what I typed properly I was saying "if it's to save your very life, use TEXT CHAT", but maybe your speed-reading missed that, I don't know for certain. But the thing is that Text Chat is cutting corners, and when talking to someone one doesn't usually cut corners, unless of course you cut corners with your friends then be my guest. (Cutting corners when speaking with friends is like cutting corners when you're giving them something, say a gift, you wouldn't give them something that's been USED...and if you do, wow.) I will repeat what I have been trying to say. Example: 2day i wnt 2 shp 2 by mor fod vs Today I went to the shop to buy more food. Now both can be written by the same person, but WHICH in all honesty sounds more intelligent? If you say the first one we both have very different perceptions of intelligence. Hands down the sentence that is typed properly will sound more intelligent (but that could JUST BE ME). Also the meaning of contractions is that one abridges one letter between two words to make them "one word" as taught by school and other academic facilities (do not = don't, should not = shouldn't) and the other "contraction" you are suggesting shears off entire WORDS (see example) as well as possibly using acronyms (tl;dr, IDK and others). The only exception to the rule I can think of that would still fall under text chat that is semi-acceptable would be emoticons because text words do not convey emotion and even then I don't consider those to be a mark of great textual worth. (Especially '^_^' a plague upon anyone who wants to be taken seriously with that thing in their words) Also do you know the connotations of 'n00b'? Being a 'n00b' means you are a NEWBIE (which is where the word 'n00b' comes from) which means inexperienced, not to be held accountable for their actions and ignorant which is, last I checked the opposite of being intelligent (which makes 'n00b' accurate to the word it is based on). And yes we were all newbies at one point but you are supposed to surpass your previous newbie-dom as soon as possible shouldn't you (unless of course you like not being held accountable)? Also, though it may surprise you, some people can actually type in full and coherent sentences after being introduced to a keyboard! They may type slower but they can still type nonetheless! (Given the typing speed you can gain from typing properly, even more people should be encouraged not to use "TXT CHT.") To quote a professor, "If you have something important to say on your cell phone, dial the number and TALK, your friend isn't going to die just because you didn't send them an 'lol hi' to READ on their precious cell-phone screen!" As for your adage, I say the implications were terrifying as you are saying you support "tlking lik tis" to "talking like this" for the some lame excuse that you're saving time or space as well as saying "well you don't need to type smart to sound sound" which in text chat would be "u no hav 2 b smrt 2 sond smrt". Quite frankly I find that horrifying unless you're stuck in a dangerous situation. Sitting in a hallway (or in class) and texting because you are bored is not an example of a life-threatening situation. And if the texts cost a lot of money...you could always...*gasp* call this person! PS: We all judge people, people who say they don't aren't being honest. We judge on appearance, demeanor, habits, mannerisms, speech, tone, speech content and several other factors that we, as individuals value on a personal level. I happen to judge people on how they type and how well they happen to read/interpret information, but I guess my opinion is just too HARSH.
TITISW? tl;dr kthxbai Well someone didn't fully read my post, and research into communication studies? Interesting choice or words, however forgive my preference on choosing "in my honest opinion" over "IMHO" when there is veritable time to type it out and no letter-cost strings attached (as said in my original post). Also if toddlers (or anyone for that matter) can fully employ cell-phones texting options they need to understand what the abbreviated versions mean and if they are supplied with unlimited texting and full miniature keyboards (for whatever reason this toddler has something like that, I will never know) they would typically be encouraged by their parents to use proper sentences (or at least I would believe of nurturing parents caring for a growing child). In which case the child could....dial the number and speak verbally, but I know this is a rather unique concept of communication when using a phone. I never said nor implied any point pertaining to how one speaks comparatively from one individual to another. I also mentioned the valid points and instances for abridging one's words and excusing them, however briefly I may have stated it. (Please reread my original post if you are confused). Also I partially object to your last statement, though we ideally wish for people to comment intelligently on the intellectual part of the board, you (on average) do not have to scroll very far to see mincing of the English language. Ironically, even in the first posts on this board you can see some of these grievous errors/neglects of basic English for reasons you and I may never know. (I may sound picky, but I can easily over look the occassional error, but some of them are riddled with numerous and silly mistakes.) The way I view text chat is that they are spelling many things wrong on purpose, by the time I finish coercing my brain into translating whatever was texted I am in no mood to reply to it or my respect for that person drops down a notch in terms of their grasp of the English language (however relative to their phone plan as I understand it). I don't want a "oi, meet @ SB? @ 2 4 lnch" in my box, I'd rather have a to-the-point, "--- want to meet up at Starbucks at 2:00 for lunch?" and if the "arm-and'-leg for text words" exists, a voice mail or call would more than suffice (the main reason why we have portable/cell phones). Basically what I am trying to say about texting is, if you are chopping up your sentences "because they are too long" just so you can text, what is preventing you from CALLING this person? And texting in class is not proper at all (I rebuke any person who texts when they should be listening unless that teacher happens to literally be an axe murderer), texting for a quick bit of information in a Library (or some other location where silence is necessary) I will concede is fine and even then having more details proves to be for your benefit: "pg 4 hw?" vs "Page for math homework?"/ "What page was the math homework on?" -but having ENTIRE conversations when one is otherwise able to move to another location where talking is acceptable? That is called a "social disconnect" (yes gasp in offense from my accusations avid texters!). Also I'm not barring anyone from using their precious tidbits of marred "omg hi" and replies of "o hi" instead of a simple phone call, or dare I say meeting up, but I'm merely sharing my opinion of this to the original post ("Do you think someone who uses "text chat" is stupid?") to which I heartily say "Why yes I do -unless they are in a life-and-death situation and they for some reason must contact help using crapped up words-." (Especially on the internet.) There are several other ways to communicate with a cell phone (one of the most common occurrences of text chat) which make the texting option obsolete most of the time save for the one or two instances when "we need" to get a quick check on information. Anyway if I missed addressing any of your points do tell me. But maybe I should do more research on this subject! (I'm not even going to begin to comment on your usage of the adage as the implications of what you are hinting at scares me if it is indeed what I am thinking. Also, cell PHONES are meant for talking, not texting, I don't know if that counts as a fact though, maybe I have to do more research. Then again we slap on so many extra features onto a phone it's disturbing, such as....music, net explorer, and other untold horrors.)
I believe that by "txt talking" the implications of sincerity and thought are sucked out. You can be a perfectly sane and academic human being, but omission of letters on purpose comes off as being annoying, lazy and rude unless there is substantial reason otherwise (such as ludicrous costs per letter). However, given the majority of unlimited text chat options being unleashed upon the cell phone community as well as more convenient ways to type correctly and efficiently, there really is no reason why one cannot fully type out their sentences. Also words are a bloody GIFT, USE THEM. It's like the gift/skill of reading, you didn't spend years learning how to read and write properly just to use some sort of butchered and mangled *******ization of the language just so you can POSSIBLY get your opinion down faster. This (well in this case) is a forum not the tangled horror of exchange known as the NASDAQ or a debating Senate. And we wonder why the older generations are afraid of the future.....
