World of Warcraft™

An obvious point first. I know people dislike being instructed regarding the English language. The usual reaction is to reflexively deride anyone attempting to do so, as such attempts make abusers of English feel inferior, and they respond by lashing out. It is the common person's unthinking reaction to criticism, to simply bark like a little yappy dog at those who try to illuminate the ways in which they might improve. So I fully expect that to be the highest level of reaction to the following matters.

1) That guy with the leather jacket and knives is not a colour. He is not a rouge. He is a rogue. They are very different things, although of course a rogue can indeed also be rouge.

2) To buff something is to enhance it. Originally used to describe the process of make some metallic thing shinier, it came to be used to describe enhancing things in other ways also. That's the key right there: enhancement. Now the "de-" prefix would therefore be to remove or negate that enhancement. In no way at all can "debuff" be construed so as to actually mean "buff". So when you see the following:

The Fel Rage debuff has the following effects on players:

+15k Armor
+30k Health
+100% Healing done (healing doubled)
+300% Damage done (DPS quadrupled)
+100% Size (character size doubled)
Gurtogg attacks only the player with Fel Rage until the player is dead or becomes invulnerable (e.g. Iceblock or Bubble), in that case he returns to the highest aggro target

http://www.wowwiki.com/Gurtogg_Bloodboil

It is completely wrong. All those enhancements are actually buffs. They are not debuffs.

3) "Then" and "than" are very different words. They are not interchangeable. It is incorrect to say "I am better then you", or "Paladins are better then Warriors". If you forget which one to use, here's a little hint that is easy to remember:
> means "is greater than".
< means "is less than".

What that demonstrates is the way in which the word "than" is used. Just remember those two little things and you should be capable of remembering which word to use in which situation.

These things should be covered in your primary/elementary schools.

02/18/2012 09:13 AMPosted by Killercaitie

I might have taken you seriously if you had used a toon without an alt letter.

i too would have taken him more seriously

I might have taken you seriously if you had used a toon without an alt letter.

Since, you know... That's not how you spell Fluffy in the English language.

Ouch.

I might have taken you seriously if you had used a toon without an alt letter.

Since, you know... That's not how you spell Fluffy in the English language.

Oh snap!

I might have taken you seriously if you had used a toon without an alt letter.

Since, you know... That's not how you spell Fluffy in the English language.

Not mention he used an inactive website. Use WoWpedia not wowwiki.

Buff and debuff have turned into a part of the gaming jargon. It's used to differentiate between how the interactions with the effect work. Language evolves. Getting upset over that seems a bit silly.

To buff something is to enhance it. Originally used to describe the process of make some metallic thing shinier, it came to be used to describe enhancing things in other ways also.

"Originally used to describe the process of making something metallic, shinier. It came to be used to describe enhancing things in other ways also."

To quote Choonster.

Oof, right in the english...

I might have taken you seriously if you had used a toon without an alt letter.

Since, you know... That's not how you spell Fluffy in the English language.

The first thing I noticed was "2) To buff something is to enhance it." 'Buff' used in that manner is gamer slang. It does not mean 'to increase a thing's power' anywhere outside of gaming culture. It is as valid a word as 'fo'shizzle' outside of the gaming world.

Harping on the particulars of the English language by using a slang word as a key point in an argument is... an unusual approach.

I always find it kind of funny when someone decides to make a thread like this. Usually they had one single guy misspell a word or use some incorrect grammar when speaking to/near them and then felt the need to "educate" the entire forum community on the misspelling.

Bonus points if the OP was so enraged by this "obvious" deficit in personal knowledge, the OP missed the fact that the original offender may have made the mistake unintentionally as a typo or even a Freudian slip, rather than a lack of knowing the correct word, phrase, or grammar.

Also, the rant about buff/debuff is hilarious. It's on the same level as someone complaining the word nerf isn't actually referencing nerf bats.

If you can understand what the person is getting at.. why question it? Unless it's hard to decipher I really don't have a problem with how people go about communicating. Our brains automatically make the connection in 99% of circumstances where someone uses 'their' instead of 'there' or 'to' instead of 'too' as two what they are getting at.

We have slang and jargon that most people accept even though it's not 'correct'.

The people I know who majored in English are all working at McDonalds or simply don't have jobs. The ones who did math and sciences, who put less emphasis (and in some cases don't give a !@#$) on actually composing themselves correctly in regards to language are doing quite well. Obviously this is a bit exaggerated, but on most exams I ever did in University they didn't give two flying %^-*s what your grammar or spelling was like as long as you drove your point across.

An obvious point first. I know people dislike being instructed regarding the English language. The usual reaction is to reflexively deride anyone attempting to do so, as such attempts make abusers of English feel inferior, and they respond by lashing out. It is the common person's unthinking reaction to criticism, to simply bark like a little yappy dog at those who try to illuminate the ways in which they might improve. So I fully expect that to be the highest level of reaction to the following matters.

1) That guy with the leather jacket and knives is not a colour. He is not a rouge. He is a rogue. They are very different things, although of course a rogue can indeed also be rouge.

2) To buff something is to enhance it. Originally used to describe the process of make some metallic thing shinier, it came to be used to describe enhancing things in other ways also. That's the key right there: enhancement. Now the "de-" prefix would therefore be to remove or negate that enhancement. In no way at all can "debuff" be construed so as to actually mean "buff". So when you see the following:

The Fel Rage debuff has the following effects on players:

+15k Armor
+30k Health
+100% Healing done (healing doubled)
+300% Damage done (DPS quadrupled)
+100% Size (character size doubled)
Gurtogg attacks only the player with Fel Rage until the player is dead or becomes invulnerable (e.g. Iceblock or Bubble), in that case he returns to the highest aggro target

http://www.wowwiki.com/Gurtogg_Bloodboil

It is completely wrong. All those enhancements are actually buffs. They are not debuffs.

3) "Then" and "than" are very different words. They are not interchangeable. It is incorrect to say "I am better then you", or "Paladins are better then Warriors". If you forget which one to use, here's a little hint that is easy to remember:
> means "is greater than".
< means "is less than".

What that demonstrates is the way in which the word "than" is used. Just remember those two little things and you should be capable of remembering which word to use in which situation.

These things should be covered in your primary/elementary schools.

Since I did not grow up in North America, I grew up in Brasil. English became my 5th linguas starting when I was 11. I didn't move to the USA till the American Government gave me a full scholorship for UCLA and handed me my citizenship.

Not all of us grew up with "These things" in Primary/elementary schools. For us we usually learn French and Italian in grade 1-7.

I might have taken you seriously if you had used a toon without an alt letter.

Since, you know... That's not how you spell Fluffy in the English language.

/thread

Big words does not a smart person make.

I might have taken you seriously if you had used a toon without an alt letter.

Since, you know... That's not how you spell Fluffy in the English language.

Well this is /thread...

So according to you, if there is an effect that buffs my defenses, but lowers my movement speed, I can't call it a buff OR a debuff? What should it be called then, according to the 'proper' English languge? Buff-de-buff? Debuffeitybuff? Debuffbuffdebuff?

And I really think all these people who harp on English mistakes really need to watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7E-aoXLZGY

02/18/2012 09:19 AMPosted by Karat

Getting upset over that seems a bit silly.

This is especially true with some of the debuffs that are more of buffs and buffs that are somewhat like debuffs. /shrug I'm indifferent to this discussion either way. ><

So according to you, if there is an effect that buffs my defenses, but lowers my movement speed, I can't call it a buff OR a debuff? What should it be called then, according to the 'proper' English languge? Buff-de-buff? Debuffeitybuff? Debuffbuffdebuff?

And I really think all these people who harp on English mistakes really need to watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7E-aoXLZGY

That is a great video.

Ah, the art of grammar...the difference of knowing your crap vs knowing you're crap.

di·a·lect [ di ə lèkt ]

1. regional variety of language: a regional variety of a language, with differences in vocabulary, grammar, and pronunciation

2. language spoken by class or profession: a form of a language spoken by members of a social class or profession

3. nonstandard speech: nonstandard spoken language