opinion on 'literacy / illiteracy' divide

[Nak3dAng3l]

I find the whole "you must be literate to join us." A tad stupid. Just like how we always create bullies within our schools, enemies overseas- we're using the "us vs them" gimmick and it's absolutely useless. What difference is a few misspelled words? They're simple to fix and teaching literacy only takes a few days to a few weeks with teaching practice.

I've taught quite a few people on how to improve their literacy from semi literacy to literate if they wish so; just because they were having problems joining groups and nowadays they find it's much more fun to role play (they completely wished to change their style; just wanted to iron that in there.)- however, it can get a bit stiff with groups at times (the ones that tend to be more realistic and literate than needed). The stiff role playing, serious expressions- those two I've found soften with time and you can find a kind person underneath.

If we wish to fix this "us vs them" gimmick we need to change popular role plays as a whole. So, if you are creating a group you should not put "literate" or "active" within your group recruition. Let's see how many people we can get onto this ship so that we can fix the gimmick as a whole.

[Eldether]

Honestly, I don't see a problem with roleplay samples or a literate rule for a group. Some people just like longer posts, ect. But I'd never ignore or be rude to an 'illiterate' person or beginner RPers. I'm willing to help them learn. You do have some good points though.. I'm not here to pick out a fight.

[Enoki]

Ah, as many 'ave said, the term "literate" has definitely changed in the FH world. I use it as a roleplay style term, even though we all know it truly does not mean any of these such uses. Such as full sentences, constructed the best the user can make them, and not "*eats grass* hi, how are you *Cindy asks*" and so on and so forth. M'group looks only f'er y'er very best, not m'own, or someone else's, but y'ers. We try our best to teach and guide members to become a better them- a better roleplayer in their own style. Who knows? One day someone from this lil' game may become the next author of the century. All they need is a helping hand along the way.

I think people all 'ave their own definition of the terms when using it on FH, but they seem to all be similar in comparison. People will continue to use these terms as they 'ave become a staple in the lingo of FH. To change that now would take a very long time to catch on and get accustomed to, since 'tis everywhere on the forums and imprinted in the minds of practically everyone's brain. 'Tis not negative in its own sense, just in the way those few who abuse it.

I must disagree to a point, Nak3dAng3l. To put "active" in y'er group's description does not mean the members are forced to be active themselves, rather the roleplay itself is active. That is in no way negative, and as I 'ave previously stated above, neither is literacy. 'Tis the way people use these words is what makes them negative and harmful. Although, I must agree with the point I assume ye are trying to get across. Forcing members to type a certain way and be on at a certain time or a certain amount of time is no fun f'er y'er members. What is the point of playing if ye are forced to do certain things to continue to roleplay with a certain group? Members should be free to pick and choose what time or how long they stay on and how they form their roleplay posts. Freedom f'er the posts!

[Klipspringer]

I don't mean for this to come off the wrong way, but I can see why some people would want "literates" as opposed to "illiterates." Situationally speaking, in a group where players typically have a couple of parahraphs per post, especially with vivid descriptions, a "he bit her hard" or even a "The feline pounced, sinking his teeth into her" may seem out of place. I know I'm not typically one for super indulgent roleplays with tons of details, I do like to imagine it like a story I'm writing with my partners/groupmates.

But as for the whole division between or using it as an excuse to bully or exclude people is just wrong. I understand if people were to turn down someone, but there's a difference between a decline and exclusion. Personally, with my past groups, failing as they were, I prefer to go with an "Alright, but you may want to add some more details as we go along."

[angels_]

I'm honestly a bit guilty of this myself. But, I have a bit of a reason for it. While I firmly believe that people who are not as literate should be allowed to learn from those who are more so, I also believe that it's hard to move a story along and/or make a connection between characters when there are very obvious literary barriers between them. And, in my eyes, excessive emojis can be a sign of immaturity(not that this is necessarily a bad thing), and one of my immediate turn-offs when it comes to befriending someone in the game is when someone is using a lot of emojis/abbreviations ("xD lawl") simply because my mind sort of associates that with an immaturity. Not that this is so for everyone, and I know that I probably should be a bit more open-minded, but I believe that there is a bit of a need for the literate/illiterate barrier. Not completely, of course, keeping in mind different roleplay styles.

But imagine someone using asterisks or dashes (*/-) to roleplay with someone who roleplayed as if they were writing a book? It doesn't really fit well together. (ex. "*he bites her*" versus "His teeth dug into her skin.")

This is only my opinion though. I understand if anyone disagrees.

[barghosts]

tbh i don't know where i stand on this topic but
as you can see i'm not exactly trying to keep my sentences of a novel standard but that's just because i don't need to or want to
to me people should freely be able to type however they want whether it be "text-talk" (example: lol, ur, m8)
but i can also understand people wanting "literate" RPers in their group just to keep a good pace of story and interaction going without people having to sit there and play "decipher the message"
having said that, there's a line between a need for literate RPers and being a downright mean god-complex jerk
i'm talking about people being highly strict on what they expect in a RP post, like some of you just require to be able to type more than two sentences and have a decent spelling and punctuation
but then there are others that want even more than that, gotta be able to type out a whole book in 2 minutes, perfect grammar, a detailed to the very core. these kind of people are what makes it hard for everyone else to have a good time
but yeah like if it's just friendly banter within the chat then who gives a heck about english literacy? that's just my opinion

[VortexAlive]

"To each, their own."

Literacy: My thoughts on this would be that everyone has their own style, be they recruiter or recruit. There are those that don't want to make a large or well detailed post and there are those that would far prefer it. I myself prefer to role play with somewhat detailed posts but find that going further causes me to freeze up and be unable to figure out what to type. I don't mind having others who outgo me, it's very nice to see how some people can make a wall of well detailed and correctly spelled text. I also don't mind having those that use very short posts or even large and incorrectly spelled posts, it can be very funny at times when mistakes are made. If it really bothers you, instead of simply rejecting them, why not ask them if they want a helping hand?

Emojis: I find nothing wrong or immature about using emojis. I've not seen/used them in role plays but in chat they can help very much to show emotion... that is what they are. =s

Random local chat: I wouldn't mind someone jumping in lke "Like*" after I just spelled something wrong, but for someone to make a huge fuss about it would be concerning... or disconcerting. There is no need to fuss about correcting, or trying to correct, something that didn't need to be corrected anyway. There's also no need to fuss about the person who tried to correct you, that would be immature.

[Smileyme2]

I think that literate and semi-literate RPs are absolutely fine, as long as there are some other RPs out there which don't require as much writing skill to join. I personally don't mind that much as long as I can just about read what the other person is saying (I often RP with someone who never uses full stops), but other people want to feel immersed in their RP and find it hard to do so when someone says ' rawr xD' in the middle of speech. (Not that there's a problem with 'rawr xD', ahahah)

Maybe you could make your own RP for anyone to join? That way, you could have lots of fun RPing and improving your writing whilst also letting other people feel included!

[Misterwives]

I'm going to drop my two cents in, just because this kind of topic gets me going. FeralHeart is probably one of the only roleplay communities in which I've seen 'literate' and 'illiterate' be an accepted term when describing a writing style. In FH standards, being 'illiterate' has been molded into something entirely different from it's true definition, and the term illiterate in general, I feel, is just another way to strengthen this divide between the stronger writers and the weaker ones. 'Literate' roleplayers seem to forget that there are children on this game as well, and that they once started off with similar writing styles because simply, they didn't know much better. I can't stand when people stick their noses up at others in this game, honestly. I've been playing this game since 2012, and trust me, NEARLY ALL of us had that 'illiterate' phase.

I truly could give a flying duck how someone speaks to me in normal chat, whether it be proper sentences or abbreviations. However, in roleplay, I'd like to be given back what I put in; decent posts that aren't two to three sentences long. I need detail, I need content, I need to feel like the other person is interested or else I'm going to get awkward and feel annoying, or loose interest entirely. I'm not saying you need perfect grammar, perfect sentence structure, perfect spelling - nobody is perfect. We're all human. It also doesn't help that FeralHeart has no spell check, either. But I need to see some sort of effort (and be able to read what you're writing to me) in order to enjoy a roleplay experience. I do take roleplay samples for my groups, and I have no problem giving them; and I like to believe I'm farely lenient when it comes to grammar and spelling. As long as I can seen that someone is putting forth the effort, and if their writing is readable, than I don't see a reason to reject someone from a 'literate' group.

 I had taken a break from FH for awhile to join other communities, and when I rolled back in, I resented the term 'literate' just because it was so ignorant. But unfortunately, I find myself still having to use this term when advertising, or looking for groups to join, because it seems to be the accepted term through out the game, and there's really no way display your group's writing requirements anymore.  After General/Global chat was removed, you're extremely limited, so you have to spit out requirements in the easiest and shortest way possible, 'lit', 'semi-lit', etc. I unfortunately don't see the terms going anywhere as they're just accepted as game lingo at this point, but I'm glad I'm not the only one who gets irked by it.

oh geez I rambled I'm sorry lol.