Hello. My name is Xelor

Y'all can call me Xelor. It's a name I created ages ago when I played computer games with my kids. I chose the name because: (1) it starts with "X," and I just like names that do, (2) it sounds like one of those weird names that a fantasy character might have, and (3) I'd just bought a watch.

Reading is more my thing, mostly non-fiction, but I do enjoy spy novels and political intrigue. Overall, I'm something of a perennial student, and as such, I availed my thirst for information by spending the majority of my career as a business analyst serving various manufacturing, financial and consumer goods/services firms. Several years back, I sold my firm to a much larger one and now I'm semi-retired and loving it.

Overall, though, I'm something of a perennial student and as such I put my thirst for information to good use by spending the majority of my career as a self-employed research analyst serving various manufacturing, financial and consumer goods/services firms and industry associations. Some years ago, I sold my firm to a competitor, and now I'm semi-retired (heavy on the "retired" and light on the "semi"), and loving it.

Public policy analysis and discussion is an unavoidable aspect of my profession. One can't really deliver a quality industry or competitive analysis without discussing statutory and political factors. By my tenure here, I aim to learn of how policy discourse in a venue like this compares/contrasts -- discursively and comportmentally -- with the policy banter in my daily life. I'm also curious to discover how policy discussions here differ those I, my staff and clients have had. It strikes me as an interesting addition the intersticial period between the career I'll soon formally end and whatever comes next. Speaking with near or complete strangers about public policy isn't something I'd consider doing in the "real world."

Seeing as this is a political forum, I suppose a debut is incomplete without one's doing what I never do in polite company: disclose my political leanings. I describe myself as a "free agent" Republican. What's that mean? It means that I know in the U.S., if you intend to have any say, you pretty much have to register as either a Democrat or Republican and vote for someone running on one of those parties' tickets.

I voted for Ford, Reagan, and then Bush XLVI the first time. Then I voted for Clinton, and wished I had not voted for Bush II the second time around. I willingly voted for Obama and I voted for Clinton II. I voted for her because Trump strikes me as a contemptible orgy of vulgarity masquerading, with the natural grace of an intoxicated beluga whale, as a human being who, when it comes to deep public policy awareness and integrity, is all hat and no cattle, and who surrounds himself with people who, when he lies, they swear to it, he believes it, and has, moreover, the temerity to presume the rest of us are too myopic to tell he's anything other than a miserable scoundrel and a naive maladjusted libertine delinquent overcome with delusions of adequacy.

For all the reading I do, I don't often read political science texts, but I consume economics papers by the boatload. Of modern economists who matter, some of my favorites -- not for their normative positions, per se, but because they have interesting ideas that are worth understanding -- are:

• Fehr and Fischbacher
• Christopher Antoniou Pissarides
• Barbara Bergmann
• Kenneth Arrow
• Robert Lucas
• Joseph Stiglitz

On some issues:

• Gun Control/Rights - Guns aren't the problem, the culture, people and their attitudes are; however, guns are controllable, people far less so. If one's willing to await cultural change, okay, but if leaders want to effect cultural change, then they should have to face personally every loved one of persons who were killed/maimed by guns.
• Abortion - One can't be killed prior to one's birth. I don't care why she's pregnant; she doesn't want to be. The lives of the born have priority over the unborn.
• Taxes - Nobody wants to pay more taxes. People who pay the most taxes deserve the most say on how taxes are spent.
• Education - Mastering what's taught is kids' job. They can exceed expectations or not, but their scholastic performance will the quality of their adult lives. It's not a kid's fault his parents are lame, but it's not mine either, thus I brook no sad stories about how formerly low-performing students can't get lucrative jobs.
• Middle East - Israel needs to build only on its side of the Strip, Heights, and West Bank. The Palestinians need to stop exploding things. The U.S. needs to let someone else solve that problem.
• ISIS - Why nobody sees the correlation between the Order of Assassins and ISIS and has yet to, with unrelenting deliberacy, be to ISIS what the Mongols were to the Order, is beyond me.

welcome aboard X, i look forward to chatting with you on the various subforums
my prediction is you will like it here. lots of kindred spirits

justabubba said:

welcome aboard X, i look forward to chatting with you on the various subforums
my prediction is you will like it here. lots of kindred spirits

Click to expand...

Thank you.

Welcome.

Trump hate. What a unique and underrepresented perspective here. :mrgreen:

Xelor said:

I voted for her because Trump strikes me as a contemptible orgy of vulgarity masquerading, with the natural grace of an intoxicated beluga whale

Click to expand...

One of the more accurate descriptions of Trump I've heard thus far. Welcome aboard.

I am taking a moment here to address a topic that several members have broached elsewhere on the forum: the nature of my diction and syntax. So, let me be clear here:

• In General:
  • The diction readers here observe is the same diction I use in the "real world" when I'm speaking to other adults with whom I discuss topics of the nature I discuss here.
  • The diction and sentence structure I've been using here is no different than that which I've been using to discuss topics (like those I discuss on DP) since I was in high school.
  • Only on the Internet has anyone ever complained about it.
  • The diction and syntax I use won't change.
• Specifics:
  • It's not going to alter my diction or syntax because I have no will to affect a writing style.
  • I'm well aware, and have been since I was ~18, that my diction and syntax make it difficult for some readers to fully comprehend.
  • Periodically, I use an online utility to check the readability of my prose. In most instances, if the tool indicates the text should be easily understood by 15-25 year olds, which is overwhelmingly the response I get, I'm fine with it. I am because, truly, I don't post anything to entreat for conversations with anyone other than adults who are well versed on the topic. (If you introduce a topic and opine on it, I will assume you are at least as well versed -- innately or by way of having researched it prior to introducing it -- on it as am I.)
    
    FWIW, the tool returned the following ratings for the noted posts:
    • 18-19 year olds:
      • The Strange Incoherence of Modern Conservatives
    • 17-18 year olds:
      • Narrative portion of Social Welfare
      • What to do when there's no "there" there and when there's lots of "there" there
    • 19-20 year olds:
      • Post 252 in Do you concur with any race-based....
    • 20-21 year olds:
      • The entirety of the OP's five posts in A guy you've probably have never heard of whose ideas are governing your fate
    • 21-22 year olds:
      • The entirety of the OP's four posts in The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump
      • Posts 6, 7, and 8 in Is Quality of Life Actually Increasing?
    • 22-23 year olds:
      • Post #2 here: Is Quality of Life Actually Increasing?
  • I realize that occasionally, most often when writing about business, economics, jurisprudence, and history, I mention "stuff" that I know isn't typically encountered in many folks' experience. (That many people don't encounter such notions is what it is, but that they haven't met with that aspect of the topic doesn't make it ingermane to the topic.)
    
    In those instances, I provide hyperlinks to content that explains the idea/concept upon which my remark(s) draw. In other instances, I provide endnotes that clarify or otherwise expound on an idea I express in the main part of my post. In all cases, however, the point of my doing so is to give readers a ready place to look for the background/clarification needed to fully understand and, in turn, respond to my comments if one so chooses. The links and notes are there to add perspective, inclusivity and accessibility to my posts some may find "hard to understand." (Post 31's link on "economic luxury good" in "What School of...." is a good illustration of what I mean.)
  • A thesaurus does not abet my diction on DP. The overwhelming majority of my diction comes from the words high school kids are expected to have learned (Note: many of the definitions provided in the linked document are highly abridged) and, if they intend to go to college, remember and use.

In closing, know that I've posted the remarks here to respond in one place to some of the remarks I've seen people post. I've seen such remarks often enough that I wanted a place to which to point subsequent makers of such remarks. Make no mistake, however. Among the reasons I didn't pursue a political career is that I know myself well enough to know that, as goes what folks think of my diction/syntax and total strangers in general, I'm of the same mind as Coco Chanel.

Hopefully readers know the difference between caring and wanting to know. Notice that I didn't in this post ask what one thinks about my diction and syntax.

At least I detect some self-awareness in your post;

“Periodically, I use an online utility to check the readability of my prose. ”


The fact that you felt the need for this post, makes it clear that you have already been notified of what “one” thinks of your diction and syntax.

Rexedgar said:

At least I detect some self-awareness in your post;

“Periodically, I use an online utility to check the readability of my prose. ”


The fact that you felt the need for this post, makes it clear that you have already been notified of what “one” thinks of your diction and syntax.

Click to expand...

That is made clear by the first sentence in the post:

I am taking a moment here to address a topic that several members have broached elsewhere on the forum: the nature of my diction and syntax.

Click to expand...

Have you something to say that doesn't repeat what I've already said? If you answer, please be sure to read post 7's last sentence too.

Xelor said:

That is made clear by the first sentence in the post:

Have you something to say that doesn't repeat what I've already said? If you answer, please be sure to read post 7's last sentence too.

Click to expand...

Your entire post is a response to your last sentence in post # 7. There is a crying room here; you have been here long enough to have access to it. The fact that you piggy-back this post on your “Hi, I’m Xelor” post seems sneaky to me. BTW, color adds nothing to your posts. Y’all? Does that occur in your daily conversation as well?

Rexedgar said:

Your entire post is a response to your last sentence in post # 7. There is a crying room here; you have been here long enough to have access to it. The fact that you piggy-back this post on your “Hi, I’m Xelor” post seems sneaky to me. BTW, color adds nothing to your posts. Y’all? Does that occur in your daily conversation as well?

Click to expand...

The post is in this thread because this is the only thread in which I am the topic of the thread. Outside of this thread, I have no reason to make myself and things pertaining to me the central topic of discussion. Read the OP in this thread. What's it about? Me.

Xelor said:

The post is in this thread because this is the only thread in which I am the topic of the thread. Outside of this thread, I have no reason to make myself and things pertaining to me the central topic of discussion. Read the OP in this thread. What's it about? Me.

Click to expand...

This is the wrong place for this exchange, as you are well aware. That you choose to make a “to whom it may concern” post in the “welcome wagon” area speaks to a reluctance to face your detractors in an open way. Have a nice evening......

Rexedgar said:

This is the wrong place for this exchange, as you are well aware. That you choose to make a “to whom it may concern” post in the “welcome wagon” area speaks to a reluctance to face your detractors in an open way. Have a nice evening......

Click to expand...

Is there something prohibiting folks from posting here? Nothing has stopped you.

Xelor said:

Is there something prohibiting folks from posting here? Nothing has stopped you.

Click to expand...

Thanks to your post, I found something I did not know about; online readability software. I took the liberty of running your post # 7 through this random example.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Online-Utility.org
Utilities for Online Operating System
Online Utility
English Language
Text
Math
Other


Tests Document Readability

Readability Calculator


This free online software tool calculates readability : Coleman Liau index, Flesch Kincaid Grade Level, ARI (Automated Readability Index), SMOG. The measure of readability used here is the indication of number of years of education that a person needs to be able to understand the text easily on the first reading. Comprehension tests and skills training.
This tool is made primarily for English texts but might work also for some other languages. In general, these tests penalize writers for polysyllabic words and long, complex sentences. Your writing will score better when you: use simpler diction, write short sentences.
It also displays complicated sentences (with many words and syllables) with suggestions for what you might do to improve its readability.
Number of characters (without spaces) : 3,274.00
Number of words : 747.00
Number of sentences : 32.00
Average number of characters per word : 4.38
Average number of syllables per word : 1.50
Average number of words per sentence: 23.34
Indication of the number of years of formal education that a person requires in order to easily understand the text on the first reading
Gunning Fog index : 12.98
Approximate representation of the U.S. grade level needed to comprehend the text :
Coleman Liau index : 8.73
Flesch Kincaid Grade level : 11.22
ARI (Automated Readability Index) : 10.89
SMOG : 11.82
Flesch Reading Ease : 56.18

List of sentences that we suggest you consider rewriting to improve readability:

) FWIW, the tool returned the following ratings for the noted posts:

18-19 year olds: The Strange Incoherence of Modern Conservatives 17-18 year olds: Narrative portion of Social Welfare What to do when there's no "there" there and when there's lots of "there" there 19-20 year olds: Post 252 in Do you concur with any race-based.

20-21 year olds: The entirety of the OP's five posts in A guy you've probably have never heard of whose ideas are governing your fate 21-22 year olds: The entirety of the OP's four posts in The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump Posts 6, 7, and 8 in Is Quality of Life Actually Increasing?

The overwhelming majority of my diction comes from the words high school kids are expected to have learned (Note: many of the definitions provided in the linked document are highly abridged) and, if they intend to go to college, remember and use.

Among the reasons I didn't pursue a political career is that I know myself well enough to know that, as goes what folks think of my diction/syntax and total strangers in general, I'm of the same mind as Coco Chanel.

In all cases, however, the point of my doing so is to give readers a ready place to look for the background/clarification needed to fully understand and, in turn, respond to my comments if one so chooses.

I realize that occasionally, most often when writing about business, economics, jurisprudence, and history, I mention "stuff" that I know isn't typically encountered in many folks' experience.
(If you introduce a topic and opine on it, I will assume you are at least as well versed -- innately or by way of having researched it prior to introducing it -- on it as am I.

So, let me be clear here: In General: The diction readers here observe is the same diction I use in the "real world" when I'm speaking to other adults with whom I discuss topics of the nature I discuss here.

In most instances, if the tool indicates the text should be easily understood by 15-25 year olds, which is overwhelmingly the response I get, I'm fine with it.

The diction and sentence structure I've been using here is no different than that which I've been using to discuss topics (like those I discuss on DP) since I was in high school.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I bolded the pertinent parts.......

Hope this helps, BEBEST, Coco...



Final Edit:

Text with a very high Flesch reading ease score (about 100) is straightforward and easy to read, with short sentences and no words of more than two syllables. Usually, a reading ease score of 60-70 is considered acceptable/normal for web copy. source: Wikipedia.com.Jul 7, 2015


They score your post at 56.18/100

Rexedgar said:

Online-Utility.org

....

....use simpler diction, write short sentences.
It also displays complicated sentences (with many words and syllables) with suggestions for what you might do to improve its readability.

....

Final Edit:

Text with a very high Flesch reading ease score (about 100) is straightforward and easy to read, with short sentences and no words of more than two syllables. Usually, a reading ease score of 60-70 is considered acceptable/normal for web copy. source: Wikipedia.com.Jul 7, 2015


They score your post at 56.18/100

Click to expand...

The relevant sentences in post 7:In short, if an adult asserts something I wrote is too hard to understand on account of my diction and syntax and the relevant passage should be easily read by 15-18 year-olds, in the abstract, well, that is what it is. It's a wholly different matter if a minor makes the same assertion about the same text.



Red:
It's worth noting that I don't write "web copy." I'm guessing you don't know what web copy is, so for you edification, I've provided links that'll tell you.

• The Difference Between Web Copy and Web Content
• Website Copy
• Web Content Vs. Web Copy – There Is A Difference

After reading the above linked-to information, note the following:

• I am not the owner of DP.
• My fortunes will neither rise nor fall on account of anything I post here.
• I'm not selling anything. Regardless of what anyone else may think, I decide what is the rhetorical purpose of my posts, and I assure you, here on DP, my rhetorical purpose isn't ever to sell anything.
• Were I trying to sell something, my diction and syntax would differ.
  
  For example, I and my employees wrote our sales presentations to about a 6th to 7th grade reading level. In contrast, we wrote our reports on a high school/collegiate level. There are multiple reasons why we did, but the one germane to yours and my exchange is that writing at higher reading levels allows one to pack more, more powerful and more precise meaning in each word, thus using fewer words to covey the same quantity and quality of ideas. The difference is analogous to using a saw or a scalpel to perform an operation. Each tool has its use, but which to use depends on the surgeon's ends, not the patient's.
  
  To wit, click on the following two words -- germane and palter -- read the definitions, and then scroll to the synonym guide to see the connotative meaning the words also carry.
  
  Just as words carry meaning, so too does verb conjugation, which carries verbs' number, person, tense and mood. To wit, the subjunctive mood conveys counterfactuality and/or uncertainty. Punctuation too carries meaning. Commas, among other things, distinguish among dependent and independent clauses in sentences.
  
  Syntactically, I mostly use the active rather than passive voice. I do so to make my prose easier to read, to emphasize the subject rather than the predicate of my sentences, for clarity, for precision and to shorten the length of independent clauses. To wit, much of the work my firm did for clients involved discussions about processes in which humans and machines have roles. Writing process narratives to explain such a process required my staff to write in the active voice to denote clearly whether a software program, machine, or human performed any given action.

Suffice to say, I write the way I do and I'll not alter it, nor will I take umbrage or be chagrined for doing so, for most readers who've reached their majority, or who have a high school diploma, should, as the readability checker notes, have no difficulty reading my prose.

Xelor said:

I personally believe we developed language because of our deep inner need to complain.​

-- Jane Wagner, The Search for Signs of Intelligent Life in the Universe
​

<snipped for character limits>


Red:
It's worth noting that I don't write "web copy." I'm guessing you don't know what web copy is, so for you edification, I've provided links that'll tell you.

• The Difference Between Web Copy and Web Content
• Website Copy
• Web Content Vs. Web Copy – There Is A Difference

After reading the above linked-to information, note the following:

• I am not the owner of DP.
• My fortunes will neither rise nor fall on account of anything I post here.
• I'm not selling anything. Regardless of what anyone else may think, I decide what is the rhetorical purpose of my posts, and I assure you, here on DP, my rhetorical purpose isn't ever to sell anything.
• Were I trying to sell something, my diction and syntax would differ.
  
  For example, I and my employees wrote our sales presentations to about a 6th to 7th grade reading level. In contrast, we wrote our reports on a high school/collegiate level. There are multiple reasons why we did, but the one germane to yours and my exchange is that writing at higher reading levels allows one to pack more, more powerful and more precise meaning in each word, thus using fewer words to covey the same quantity and quality of ideas. The difference is analogous to using a saw or a scalpel to perform an operation. Each tool has its use, but which to use depends on the surgeon's ends, not the patient's.
  
  To wit, click on the following two words -- germane and palter -- read the definitions, and then scroll to the synonym guide to see the connotative meaning the words also carry.
  
  Just as words carry meaning, so too does verb conjugation, which carries verbs' number, person, tense and mood. To wit, the subjunctive mood conveys counterfactuality and/or uncertainty. Punctuation too carries meaning. Commas, among other things, distinguish among dependent and independent clauses in sentences.
  
  Syntactically, I mostly use the active rather than passive voice. I do so to make my prose easier to read, to emphasize the subject rather than the predicate of my sentences, for clarity, for precision and to shorten the length of independent clauses. To wit, much of the work my firm did for clients involved discussions about processes in which humans and machines have roles. Writing process narratives to explain such a process required my staff to write in the active voice to denote clearly whether a software program, machine, or human performed any given action.

Suffice to say, I write the way I do and I'll not alter it, nor will I take umbrage or be chagrined for doing so, for most readers who've reached their majority, or who have a high school diploma, should, as the readability checker notes, have no difficulty reading my prose.

What you're supposed to do when you don't like a thing is change it. If you can't change it, change the way you think about it. Don't complain.
-- Maya Angelou, Wouldn't Take Nothing for My Journey Now​

Click to expand...

Good catch on the web copy/content portion of the comment. Given the speed and the formula that the "Flesch" method uses to arrive at a "readability" number, I'm going to wager that the software cannot differentiate between the two. Thanks for clueing me in to the readability software on the web. That there are more than one posters who have raised concerns with your "diction and syntax" and your lengthy response, it would seem to be a sore spot. We had a chat early on. You also raised a complaint about some function @ DP early in your time here. That complaint, so early, was what got me to look at some of your posts. After our chat, we went in different directions, until I happened upon your post #7. I've told you what I thought about that post already. What this all boils down to is the fact that you think you are very clever and I do not agree. If wanted to convey the sentiment of your post #s 7 and 15, it would not have taken me 747 and 671 words, respectively, Cheers!

Rexedgar said:

Good catch on the web copy/content portion of the comment. Given the speed and the formula that the "Flesch" method uses to arrive at a "readability" number, I'm going to wager that the software cannot differentiate between the two. Thanks for clueing me in to the readability software on the web. That there are more than one posters who have raised concerns with your "diction and syntax" and your lengthy response, it would seem to be a sore spot. We had a chat early on. You also raised a complaint about some function @ DP early in your time here. That complaint, so early, was what got me to look at some of your posts. After our chat, we went in different directions, until I happened upon your post #7. I've told you what I thought about that post already. What this all boils down to is the fact that you think you are very clever and I do not agree. If wanted to convey the sentiment of your post #s 7 and 15, it would not have taken me 747 and 671 words, respectively, Cheers!

Click to expand...

Blue:
You're welcome.

Red:

• With them? I really hazard to say.
• With me? Not at all. I merely wanted to write a response and put it in a place that I wouldn't forget so that if/when I deign to respond to someone's remarks about my diction or syntax, I have a post to which I can point them. To wit, re-read the final sentence in post seven.

:beatdeadhorse:

Cheers!

Xelor said:

with the natural grace of an intoxicated beluga whale

Click to expand...

I don't know... intoxicated or not, beluga whales are among the most graceful creatures on the planet. Ever see one?

Taylor said:

I don't know... intoxicated or not, beluga whales are among the most graceful creatures on the planet. Ever see one?

Click to expand...

Yes, and I've seen both Gazelles and Taylor deer in action. Even within their element, no whale can close to the grace of movement of either. I've also seen Ballet, Flamenco and modern dance. Beauty remains in the eyes of the beholder.

Taylor said:

I don't know... intoxicated or not, beluga whales are among the most graceful creatures on the planet. Ever see one?

Click to expand...

Well, it's a sea mammal, and a big one to boot, so, yes, it's quite graceful.

That said, I've not seen a drunk one, but as a higher order mammal, the only thing that may make it appear not to be ungainly while wasted, as it were, is that its movements happen in the water where there's no linear visual reference point for assessing its motion.

This video should help you understand what I mean.




And, yes, I've seen a beluga whale (from a boat); however, I've never seen a drunk one, or at least not one I knew to be drunk.

Xelor...

How do you pronounce it?

Xelor said:

Well, it's a sea mammal, and a big one to boot, so, yes, it's quite graceful.

That said, I've not seen a drunk one, but as a higher order mammal, the only thing that may make it appear not to be ungainly while wasted, as it were, is that its movements happen in the water where there's no linear visual reference point for assessing its motion.

And, yes, I've seen a beluga whale (from a boat); however, I've never seen a drunk one, or at least not one I knew to be drunk.

Click to expand...

I'd say pretty small as far as whales go, but I imagine it'd still take a lot of vodka to get one drunk!

FWIW "Elephants Drunk on Marula Fruit" appears to be a myth:

https://www.livescience.com/3960-tipsy-elephants-poisoned-drunk.html

Dolphins like a good buzz! https://youtu.be/iVqObIauPJA

1750Texan said:

Xelor...

How do you pronounce it?

Click to expand...

Do you mean the first or second syllable?

• I pronounce the initial consonant sound the same way I pronounce the initial consonant sound in "xylophone;" however, the initial consonant isn't quite as clearly a zee sound as is the zee in, say, "zest" or any other word that is spelled with a zee at the start. That said, the whole of the first syllable sounds roughly like "zell."
• I pronounce the second syllable the same way I pronounce the second syllable of "color." (My accent is mildly non-rhotic.)