Wez wrote

Kobeeeeeeee wrote

Wez wrote Yes, it doesn't bother me that much to be honest.

They are better than the people who make no attempt whatsoever to appear somewhat intelligent.

However, it does allow me to differentiate the pseudo-intellects from the 'real'-intellects.

It should be "pseudo-intellectuals" and "real-intellectuals."

An error of cultural difference and upbringing forces me into the group of a pseudo-intellectual?

Fair enough.

Also, 'Intellects' is a word, the plural of intellect which describes a person of intelligence, adding 'Pseudo' to it simply changes it to a person who forces fake intelligence, making the statement grammatically accurate.

However, I do not wish to engage in an argument with someone who is quite obviously looking for self gratification, therefore feels the need to demote someone intellectually based on a minute mistake.

PS: Being able to differentiate between the pseudo-intellects and the real intellects because of the way they write, which is something that I am able to do after studying orthography does not put me into a position of high intellectual prowess, I did not claim that, nor have I ever.

However, I do see that, perhaps I am guilty of judging people on their writing style when they may simply not have the attention span to write effectively at that particular moment, so on that point, you are correct.

I vouch for this.

TBH, I think its a huge time waster and dont understand why some people do it.

TTGxFame wrote I Tend To Put A Capital Letter In front Of Every Word, I Just Find It Easier...

Your forgot "front".

Wez wrote

Kobeeeeeeee wrote

Wez wrote Yes, it doesn't bother me that much to be honest.

They are better than the people who make no attempt whatsoever to appear somewhat intelligent.

However, it does allow me to differentiate the pseudo-intellects from the 'real'-intellects.

It should be "pseudo-intellectuals" and "real-intellectuals."

An error of cultural difference and upbringing forces me into the group of a pseudo-intellectual?

Fair enough.

Also, 'Intellects' is a word, the plural of intellect which describes a person of intelligence, adding 'Pseudo' to it simply changes it to a person who forces fake intelligence, making the statement grammatically accurate.

However, I do not wish to engage in an argument with someone who is quite obviously looking for self gratification, therefore feels the need to demote someone intellectually based on a minute mistake.

PS: Being able to differentiate between the pseudo-intellects and the real intellects because of the way they write, which is something that I am able to do after studying orthography does not put me into a position of high intellectual prowess, I did not claim that, nor have I ever.

However, I do see that, perhaps I am guilty of judging people on their writing style when they may simply not have the attention span to write effectively at that particular moment, so on that point, you are correct.

Like I stated in my above comment, I personally am not classifying you as a pseudo-intellectual. You remarked that you could classify people based on grammatical errors, when you yourself made a grammatical error, there by(BY YOUR OWN DEFINITION) putting you in the pseudo-intellectual group. Again, I am not claiming to be capable of judging you through your comments, though I am also not claiming it is impossible, since for you it may very well be. I was simply having some fun with the comment that you originally left, and I did not mean to offend you at all. I do know that intellect is a word, and that intellects may be the plural of that word and may be used to describe a person or persons in the same way that intellectuals does, but I am not sure of it, and I cannot find good examples of it through google. If you can find intellects being used properly in the way that you used it above, please point me in that direction, because I'd be interested to know. I was not attacking your level of intelligence in any way with my comment, and I apologize if it was interpreted that way.

Kobeeeeeeee wrote

Wez wrote

Kobeeeeeeee wrote

Wez wrote Yes, it doesn't bother me that much to be honest.

They are better than the people who make no attempt whatsoever to appear somewhat intelligent.

However, it does allow me to differentiate the pseudo-intellects from the 'real'-intellects.

It should be "pseudo-intellectuals" and "real-intellectuals."

An error of cultural difference and upbringing forces me into the group of a pseudo-intellectual?

Fair enough.

Also, 'Intellects' is a word, the plural of intellect which describes a person of intelligence, adding 'Pseudo' to it simply changes it to a person who forces fake intelligence, making the statement grammatically accurate.

However, I do not wish to engage in an argument with someone who is quite obviously looking for self gratification, therefore feels the need to demote someone intellectually based on a minute mistake.

PS: Being able to differentiate between the pseudo-intellects and the real intellects because of the way they write, which is something that I am able to do after studying orthography does not put me into a position of high intellectual prowess, I did not claim that, nor have I ever.

However, I do see that, perhaps I am guilty of judging people on their writing style when they may simply not have the attention span to write effectively at that particular moment, so on that point, you are correct.

Like I stated in my above comment, I personally am not classifying you as a pseudo-intellectual. You remarked that you could classify people based on grammatical errors, when you yourself made a grammatical error, there by(BY YOUR OWN DEFINITION) putting you in the pseudo-intellectual group. Again, I am not claiming to be capable of judging you through your comments, though I am also not claiming it is impossible, since for you it may very well be. I was simply having some fun with the comment that you originally left, and I did not mean to offend you at all. I do know that intellect is a word, and that intellects may be the plural of that word and may be used to describe a person or persons in the same way that intellectuals does, but I am not sure of it, and I cannot find good examples of it through google. If you can find intellects being used properly in the way that you used it above, please point me in that direction, because I'd be interested to know. I was not attacking your level of intelligence in any way with my comment, and I apologize if it was interpreted that way.

Not at all, I have grown up hearing the phrase pseudo-intellect rather than the full term.
Perhaps it is simply a 'common' paraphrase where I live and I have transferred it into my writing.

I did not mean to insult when I said:

I do not wish to engage in an argument with someone who is quite obviously looking for self gratification

That may have been a tad too far.

Wez wrote

Kobeeeeeeee wrote

Wez wrote

Kobeeeeeeee wrote

Wez wrote Yes, it doesn't bother me that much to be honest.

They are better than the people who make no attempt whatsoever to appear somewhat intelligent.

However, it does allow me to differentiate the pseudo-intellects from the 'real'-intellects.

It should be "pseudo-intellectuals" and "real-intellectuals."

An error of cultural difference and upbringing forces me into the group of a pseudo-intellectual?

Fair enough.

Also, 'Intellects' is a word, the plural of intellect which describes a person of intelligence, adding 'Pseudo' to it simply changes it to a person who forces fake intelligence, making the statement grammatically accurate.

However, I do not wish to engage in an argument with someone who is quite obviously looking for self gratification, therefore feels the need to demote someone intellectually based on a minute mistake.

PS: Being able to differentiate between the pseudo-intellects and the real intellects because of the way they write, which is something that I am able to do after studying orthography does not put me into a position of high intellectual prowess, I did not claim that, nor have I ever.

However, I do see that, perhaps I am guilty of judging people on their writing style when they may simply not have the attention span to write effectively at that particular moment, so on that point, you are correct.

Like I stated in my above comment, I personally am not classifying you as a pseudo-intellectual. You remarked that you could classify people based on grammatical errors, when you yourself made a grammatical error, there by(BY YOUR OWN DEFINITION) putting you in the pseudo-intellectual group. Again, I am not claiming to be capable of judging you through your comments, though I am also not claiming it is impossible, since for you it may very well be. I was simply having some fun with the comment that you originally left, and I did not mean to offend you at all. I do know that intellect is a word, and that intellects may be the plural of that word and may be used to describe a person or persons in the same way that intellectuals does, but I am not sure of it, and I cannot find good examples of it through google. If you can find intellects being used properly in the way that you used it above, please point me in that direction, because I'd be interested to know. I was not attacking your level of intelligence in any way with my comment, and I apologize if it was interpreted that way.

Not at all, I have grown up hearing the phrase pseudo-intellect rather than the full term.
Perhaps it is simply a 'common' paraphrase where I live and I have transferred it into my writing.

I did not mean to insult when I said:

I do not wish to engage in an argument with someone who is quite obviously looking for self gratification

That may have been a tad too far.

It is completely fine. Just for fun, and in case you are interested:

If you try searching "is a person an intellect" in google, you will get a bunch of results that use the word intellectual rather than intellect, and even the wikipedia page about the word "intellectual." This leads me to believe that the proper word is in fact intellectual, as I also cannot find any "intellect vs. intellectual" comparison pages that talk about proper grammatical usage. You are probably correct that it is simply a matter that is vernacular in kind.

Kobeeeeeeee wrote

Wez wrote

Kobeeeeeeee wrote

Wez wrote

Kobeeeeeeee wrote

Wez wrote Yes, it doesn't bother me that much to be honest.

They are better than the people who make no attempt whatsoever to appear somewhat intelligent.

However, it does allow me to differentiate the pseudo-intellects from the 'real'-intellects.

It should be "pseudo-intellectuals" and "real-intellectuals."

An error of cultural difference and upbringing forces me into the group of a pseudo-intellectual?

Fair enough.

Also, 'Intellects' is a word, the plural of intellect which describes a person of intelligence, adding 'Pseudo' to it simply changes it to a person who forces fake intelligence, making the statement grammatically accurate.

However, I do not wish to engage in an argument with someone who is quite obviously looking for self gratification, therefore feels the need to demote someone intellectually based on a minute mistake.

PS: Being able to differentiate between the pseudo-intellects and the real intellects because of the way they write, which is something that I am able to do after studying orthography does not put me into a position of high intellectual prowess, I did not claim that, nor have I ever.

However, I do see that, perhaps I am guilty of judging people on their writing style when they may simply not have the attention span to write effectively at that particular moment, so on that point, you are correct.

Like I stated in my above comment, I personally am not classifying you as a pseudo-intellectual. You remarked that you could classify people based on grammatical errors, when you yourself made a grammatical error, there by(BY YOUR OWN DEFINITION) putting you in the pseudo-intellectual group. Again, I am not claiming to be capable of judging you through your comments, though I am also not claiming it is impossible, since for you it may very well be. I was simply having some fun with the comment that you originally left, and I did not mean to offend you at all. I do know that intellect is a word, and that intellects may be the plural of that word and may be used to describe a person or persons in the same way that intellectuals does, but I am not sure of it, and I cannot find good examples of it through google. If you can find intellects being used properly in the way that you used it above, please point me in that direction, because I'd be interested to know. I was not attacking your level of intelligence in any way with my comment, and I apologize if it was interpreted that way.

Not at all, I have grown up hearing the phrase pseudo-intellect rather than the full term.
Perhaps it is simply a 'common' paraphrase where I live and I have transferred it into my writing.

I did not mean to insult when I said:

I do not wish to engage in an argument with someone who is quite obviously looking for self gratification

That may have been a tad too far.

It is completely fine. Just for fun, and in case you are interested:

If you try searching "is a person an intellect" in google, you will get a bunch of results that use the word intellectual rather than intellect, and even the wikipedia page about the word "intellectual." This leads me to believe that the proper word is in fact intellectual, as I also cannot find any "intellect vs. intellectual" comparison pages that talk about proper grammatical usage. You are probably correct that it is simply a matter that is vernacular in kind.

I will make sure to use 'intellectual' in the future.
Thanks for correcting this error.

I feel the same way about that, I don't see why people spell like that.

I have a friend who does that and it does bother me...but yet somehow she still types pretty fast when doing it? I'm like "Can you imagine how fast you could type if you didn't do that?" and she says it's just a habit.

TTGxFame wrote I Tend To Put A Capital Letter In front Of Every Word, I Just Find It Easier...

:facepalm:

So spending the time to press the shift key every single time you type a new word is easier? In what world is that "easier"?

Here's what I don't get about everyone who Types Like A Moron. Why do that in the first place? It doesn't make you look intelligent, nor does it make you look unique. Capitalizing the first letter of every word in a sentence just makes you look like a moron. You spend extra time making sure that just about every single word you type is grammatically incorrect, and every single sentence that you type is also grammatically incorrect. It's not easier pressing the shift key 30 times, and it makes your posts harder to read. I'd rather have a person who does not capitalize any of the letters in their sentences than one who capitalizes the first letter of EVERY WORD in their sentence.