this post was submitted on 08 Feb 2025
144 points (97.4% liked)

InsanePeopleFacebook

2926 readers
441 users here now

Screenshots of people being insane on Facebook. Please censor names/pics of end users in screenshots. Please follow the rules of lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
all 22 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 64 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (5 children)

What is with all these same type of people capitalizing almost every word? Is it just that they rely on autocorrect so hard?

EDIT: To Clarify, I Mean Capitalize Each Word, Not ALL CAPS.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Some People just write like that. It would be less infuriating if it were at least consistent or had some apparent Purpose to it like the archaic German-style Capitalization of Nouns.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

the archaic German-style Capitalization of Nouns.

How the fuck else would you discern between these?

Er wäre gern Dichter. (He would like to be a poet)
Er wäre gern dichter. (He would like to be more stoned)

Die Spinnen. (The spiders)
Die spinnen. (They're crazy)

Ihr Erbrecht. (Her birthright)
Ihr erbrecht. (You puke)

(I fucking love this language)

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

Prefixing: I don’t think it is archaic in German, or a bad thing at all. It’s the German style of marking nouns when needed. However in English it is archaic, mostly unused since the 18th century.

As to your examples? Probably context, or the same way we in English distinguish:

  • I saw her duck (she lowered her head)
  • I saw her duck (she has an unusual pet)

All languages have ambiguity in some cases; it’s mostly fine. The examples you mention would be ambiguous when spoken [unless they also mark a pronunciation difference], so it is necessary to use that same context in that case.

Also note that a language that does have a way to distinguish nouns from verbs has a lot more leeway in using phrases that would otherwise be ambiguous, so they’re likely more common.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 day ago

I think it’s an indication of poor impulse control. They talk like this too.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago

They're copying the way Trump writes his tweets.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The PATRIOTS they listen to CAPITALIZE words for NO reason other than keeping their attention on IMPORTANT words. Its what they know.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

It's just the way that sub 80 IQ people, usually but not always boomers, emphasize important words that they would pronounce emphatically while talking.

(I guess its always boomers if you use the 'boomer is a state of mind' definition: narcissistic, uninformed, misinformed, absurdly overconfident, infantilizing, extremely entitled, dismissive, never wrong about anything... you get the idea.

Moronic assholes.)

As to why they specifically do this style of written expression?

That's actually an interesting linguistic question, at least to me.

I think its very much an intentional choice, not a result of autocorrect.

Though almost none of the people that write this way do so on platforms that support a basic syntax / tag system to modify your font/text... but they are probably too stupid/ignorant to figure out how to use it anyway.

I know it existed before Facebook, on forums, often used by religious extremists and super patriotic types, but its mass proflieration on Facebook by boomers... if I had to guess, they read a bunch of shitty ads and posts that used this style, from the mentioned precuror belligerent reactionary forum posters, and then just started emulating it.

tl:dr; its a way of yell-talking, belligerent idiots often raise their volume and intensity for nearly every word they say, but then if you tell them to stop yelling at you, they'll say they aren't, because in their mind, they could have been even louder, and with every word.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I have a feeling that I, as an atheist who is reading books about Jesus and the early church as a lover of history, may know more about the topic than she.

She's got me dead to rights, though, about guns. I don't need or want one and her having one would be the sign that I should exit.

Best part is knowing that he probably wrote a similar post about the crazy lady he got setup with. Both horrified, I'm sure.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

Another atheist here. Also of Jewish ethnicity. And I definitely know more about the New Testament than she does because she's speaking with authority and that is expressly not allowed. I'm guessing Jesus and other first century Judean men would not be a big fan of women being armed either, what with them being property at the time. Something tells me she would not agree to be property.

Also, she's likely divorced if she's a grandmother and going on dates. Jesus expressly forbids divorce. (It could be that she's widowed I suppose, but she better not have had her child out of wedlock.)

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 day ago

Bullet literally and figuratively dodged.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I get the feeling granny is only about 38 years old.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 21 hours ago

Granny looks like a catcher's mitt.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 day ago

Oh, she likes biblical knowledge quizzes, does she? Let's see if she knows 1 Timothy 2:12.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 day ago

Wow, that guy certainly dodged more than one kind of bullet.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 day ago

dmed you my contact information please pass it along to her

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The whole thing about being unequally yoked is about forbidding animal abuse, but you do you.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

2 Corinthians 6:14. Not that I believe this shit anymore, but that's not true. I've heard a number of in-depth sermons on this verse. Marriage partners being "unequally yoked", and how marriage partners need to be on the same team, pulling in the right direction, sharing the same values.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The original verse is Duet 22:10 and it's a prohibition against abusing a working animal.

I wasn't aware of the later Christian tradition of interpreting it as a metaphor for nonbelivers. Thanks for sharing it.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Everything on the Bible can be used as a metaphor pro or against something.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 hours ago

That's because it's chock full absolutes and ambiguity every time you turn a page.