![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
peristaltorOver the years on the intertubes, I've noticed when people get especially passionate about a topic they tend to forget that the common way to make words legible online is to include double page-breaks instead of the traditional single page-break and indented paragraphs. Online, I don't know why, reading an especially long paragraph makes it look like a page from ancient Greek text.
Which is, kinda, exactly the opposite of what the poster intends the reply to be, isn't it? Isn't the object of a long rant to convince the reader of their error?
So, wouldn't going on and on in a monolithic block of ranty text be a sign that the intention of the post has divorced itself from the post itself long ago, taken the children and pinned a note on the lawn?
Based on that, allow me to propose Perry's Index of Emotional Trainwreckery as Measured by Typesetting. It's a one-to-ten scale of readability based only on a lack of page breaks and other pagination. The longer the block, the closer to 10 (and a visit from the kind people in white coats) the commenter might just be.
What ya think?
Which is, kinda, exactly the opposite of what the poster intends the reply to be, isn't it? Isn't the object of a long rant to convince the reader of their error?
So, wouldn't going on and on in a monolithic block of ranty text be a sign that the intention of the post has divorced itself from the post itself long ago, taken the children and pinned a note on the lawn?
Based on that, allow me to propose Perry's Index of Emotional Trainwreckery as Measured by Typesetting. It's a one-to-ten scale of readability based only on a lack of page breaks and other pagination. The longer the block, the closer to 10 (and a visit from the kind people in white coats) the commenter might just be.
What ya think?