Viewpoint Why Do People Call It "Literacy"?

[Maxx]

A lot of request/search threads talk about being "semi-literate" or "literate" or "advanced literate". They'll talk about literacy and ability to write a lot as if it means the same thing. I've seen people call themselves advanced literate because they can write novella length, even when they have relatively sub-par grammar. I've seen people call themselves semi lit when they construct sentences beautifully.

Why? The definition of literacy is the ability to read and write. Even twisting the definition slightly, I would still think a literate writer would simply be one who knows how to construct a sentence, use grammar, and spell pretty decently. By my view of what literacy means, I would consider myself a literate to advanced literate writer, even though what I write tends to average about 500 words.

It confused me so much people put it in their search threads, honestly. It took me ages to work out what it means when people does, and still it means nothing when it comes to what people are like as writers, to me. They'll call themselves advance literate in a thread with sub-par grammar (not including people who use the aesthetic lower case, I mean people with actual bad grammar), so of course they're not talking about their grammar abilities, and don't actually say how much they write, expecting everyone to just known what they mean. Of course that isn't everyone who uses those descriptors for themselves, but it is something I've seen often.

Why do people take literacy to mean how much one can write? And where do people here stand on that meaning of it, and using it in request threads?

 

[Idea]

Why do people do it? Because it's common. I don't know the origin of it, but expressions are one of those things - like social media or types of currency- that the more people use, the more pull they have on others to use them as well. A lot of people, I believe, just use them because they see others doing it and think that's the way they are supposed to do things.

Aside from this, there is the fact that you can be very non-descriptive while trying to make yourself look good with these kinds of terms. What exactly is the line between "semi-literate" and "literate"? What of "advanced literate"? Those aren't defined terms, and they aren't even consistent for the same person a lot of the time because their standards for them will vary over time. But if you say you are "literate" you can imply a certain "level" (and I put that in airquotes because these types of distinctions aren't actually about skill) of writing without actually committing to anything specific. Mind you I'm not saying people are even necessarily consciously aware of this, much less actively attempting to deceive anyone. Rather, it's just a normal human phenomenon to avoid specific commitment when given an easy out.

Personally I really don't like the term, as stating yourself literate implies people under your "level" are illiterate? So not only is it vague and non-informative, it also doesn't really work with the word that is borrowed for the expression.

Now that being said, I do like there being some metric of how much one writes in the interest check, not because there is some kind of difference in skill inherent to writing more or less obviously, but because it denotes different styles of writing and approaches to writing.

 

[Vrai]

Are you telling me it doesn't refer to the overall complexity of the writing style somebody typically uses when roleplaying? Eg, some people use it as a place to stretch their writing skills, and use varied vocabulary and turns of phrase that reflect that; other people, although they can write a lot, are more concerned with getting from point A to B without worrying as much about the actual writing and grammar as though they were trying to be published.

I always got the impression that was what the "literate" spectrum meant -- how close your style is to "literature".

 

[Owlbear]

Why? The definition of literacy is the ability to read and write.

That depends on the definition you're using.

Another definition of literate is "versed in literature or creative writing" so it's factually correct to use to describe your skill level.

 

[Maxx]

That depends on the definition you're using.

Another definition of literate is "versed in literature or creative writing" so it's factually correct to use to describe your skill level.

I'm not saying it's not correct to use it to describe skill level, it's using it to describe length that confuses me. To me, length doesn't equal skill level, but that seems to be exactly how people use it. Making out as if they've got a higher skill level because they can write more.

 

[nerdy tangents]

I believe it started out as a method of dividing up skill levels on older roleplay sites.

For instance when I first joined RPN they used a system divided up into :

simple, casual, detailed.

They had a definition for each term that had to do with how many paragraphs you write and how much work your put into world building.

When I started roleplaying on my previous sites they had essentially the same definitions. They just called them casual, semi-lit, lit, advanced lit.

The exact paragraph numbers varied slightly by site but it all meant roughly the same thing.

Unfortunately most of those sites are now defunct but I am certainly not the only person to have migrated from them.

Hence why you see so many people using the literate terms. If you are ever curious what a vocab word means you can usually just ask the person directly. People on this site are pretty friendly and we all know we came from different places across the internet.

 

[Uxie]

if i remember correctly (not sure what i'm recalling from, though), the whole use of "literacy" specifically to demarcate post length probably came from the distinction on sites where there were roleplayers who would write in text speech/script vs. para writers— i think that's how literate came about as use within roleplaying itself, though i'm guessing that its meanings with regards to post length came about as the definitions got twisted over time.

while quantity does not equate quality nor does the latter require the former, most of the better writers i've come across do tend to write a substantial amount, which i think could have something to do with how the term ended up being linked to post lengths; what started as multi-para roleplayers just looking to distinguish themselves from text speech roleplayers evolved into searching for more specific terms to express more levels on the scale! i'm just guessing, though (¯▿¯)

it probably caught on considering there still aren't many alternatives other than directly stating your word counts to describe someone's post length concisely, though i do agree it's misleading and can be taken as derogatory (￣ ￣|||) i do think for those who have been roleplaying a long time don't see the terms as anything more than a loose label or category to better express their interests, however !

on the topic of what i personally feel, i would love to have a more accurate vocabulary replace it! but i am not nearly creative enough to come up with one, and i do think many people (on this site, i think! just from what i've seen) have shifted towards listing word counts than relying on easily misunderstood terms, which is nice too (´･ᴗ･ ` )

 

[Mitheral]

Maxx Agreed. In fact, I agree so much so that I used BOTH descriptions in what I look for in writer. I used to ask for literate. Recently I lowered that expectation to semi-literate, largely to accommodate folks who first language is not English. THEN I add my expectations for length of an average post and the understanding that I prefer quality over quantity.

Over the years I have worked with professional writers, new writers, and always adjusted my expectations to their level of ability. I can't be more reasonable than that.

Unfortunately, my own writing ability has been waning for nearly 20 years. I am literally losing words from my vocabulary, struggling to recall them. I'm not referring to complex words. I mean basic words. Sometimes I can recall a word in a foreign language, but can't remember the word in English.

 

[Katya]

A lot of request/search threads talk about being "semi-literate" or "literate" or "advanced literate". They'll talk about literacy and ability to write a lot as if it means the same thing. I've seen people call themselves advanced literate because they can write novella length, even when they have relatively sub-par grammar. I've seen people call themselves semi lit when they construct sentences beautifully.

Why? The definition of literacy is the ability to read and write. Even twisting the definition slightly, I would still think a literate writer would simply be one who knows how to construct a sentence, use grammar, and spell pretty decently. By my view of what literacy means, I would consider myself a literate to advanced literate writer, even though what I write tends to average about 500 words.

It confused me so much people put it in their search threads, honestly. It took me ages to work out what it means when people does, and still it means nothing when it comes to what people are like as writers, to me. They'll call themselves advance literate in a thread with sub-par grammar (not including people who use the aesthetic lower case, I mean people with actual bad grammar), so of course they're not talking about their grammar abilities, and don't actually say how much they write, expecting everyone to just known what they mean. Of course that isn't everyone who uses those descriptors for themselves, but it is something I've seen often.

Why do people take literacy to mean how much one can write? And where do people here stand on that meaning of it, and using it in request threads?

So after like twenty years of digressing this question. I loop it into three catagories.

1. Elementary Literacy ; a basic understanding of the english language and communicative grammar. As well as story building but not as advanced as.

2. High school literacy. You have a firm understanding of voice ,story telling and grammar construct. Grade 10 to 12 literacy.

3. Post secondary literacy. Is it evidant they make use of complex writing strategy. Is it apparent they have invested in education be it self taught or via post secondary.

I dont go by literate,semi lit or advanced.Its hecka confusinh... Buuuuut you can sort of identify literacy a bit more clear using this system.Most apps that judge literacy level use this system.


Just adding here. As someone who has been writing in groups a while. Literacy level and comprehension is a common starting point with writers. That is how I view it. Its not meant to be judgy but a tool.
I enjoy writing with all literacy levels and really admire those where english is not their first language. Those individuals often have killer grammar skills

 

[GojiBean]

I find that the two most common reasons why people seem to think "literacy" refers to how much you can write, volume wise, is because of either laziness or embarrassment.

Some people are just lazy. It's a fact of life. And it's also a fact that it's easier to just go with word of mouth than to go out of your way to fact-check and research something. "I have to waste time Googling a word? Screw that. I'm going with what that person said. They seem to know what they're talking about." It's lazy.

Other people, understandably so, are afraid to say "what do you mean by "literacy?"" The response is often sarcastic or toxic like "You seriously don't know what it means? Bruh..." Nobody wants to be on the receiving end of something like that. It's embarrassing and it's hurtful. So some people would rather avoid that and just go with what others are saying.

There's definitely other reasons as well why some out there think literacy has something to do with how much you can write. But at the end of the day when you know that it just means being able to read and write, you know that these people are wrong and that should be enough. Just ignore them and do what you can to help keep people aware of when things like this are actually incorrect and deserve a second look.

 

[StrixDesmodus]

While I would not say this is always the case, I've observed that snobbery sometimes plays a part. I've been called "illiterate" for using a laconic script style even though I used grammatically correct sentences that had clear meaning, and probably more interesting style flourishes than I have nowadays.
I wish I could have made those people understand that prattling on and on does not necessarily make a roleplay more enjoyable, that padding one's writing is not a basic skill of literary comprehension, and that calling someone illiterate as a petty and poorly matched insult is really insulting to people who actually can't read. Like seriously, there are people with dyslexia, people who have had brain injuries, people who have fallen through the cracks of their local education system. There are loads of reasons for someone to have lesser than standard skills in reading and writing, and none of them make anyone worthy of the disgrace of having a word that would succinctly convey that they can't read and write as easily as somebody else used as a catch-all for people who are trash to you. (For reference, the people who called me illiterate have called other people some worse names than they've called me, and I dare not say the words they used here.)

Thank goodness I haven't come across such behavior on this particular site, but I still get tense when I hear somebody mention literacy in that context. I had a really bad experience, to say the least.

 

[Katya]

While I would not say this is always the case, I've observed that snobbery sometimes plays a part. I've been called "illiterate" for using a laconic script style even though I used grammatically correct sentences that had clear meaning, and probably more interesting style flourishes than I have nowadays.
I wish I could have made those people understand that prattling on and on does not necessarily make a roleplay more enjoyable, that padding one's writing is not a basic skill of literary comprehension, and that calling someone illiterate as a petty and poorly matched insult is really insulting to people who actually can't read. Like seriously, there are people with dyslexia, people who have had brain injuries, people who have fallen through the cracks of their local education system. There are loads of reasons for someone to have lesser than standard skills in reading and writing, and none of them make anyone worthy of the disgrace of having a word that would succinctly convey that they can't read and write as easily as somebody else used as a catch-all for people who are trash to you. (For reference, the people who called me illiterate have called other people some worse names than they've called me, and I dare not say the words they used here.)

Thank goodness I haven't come across such behavior on this particular site, but I still get tense when I hear somebody mention literacy in that context. I had a really bad experience, to say the least.

Going to challenge this thought process a bit. Literacy standards are also a way for you to navigate which role plays work for you. Literacy is pretty important to some and it does require an ability to perform. If you have the ability but are not meeting the literacy standards laid out. Say, a paragraph of three hundred and fifty words minimum. Even though you have the comprehension that is at the same level. You are not displaying your skills and naturally, you will be judged for that and if I knew you could perform better; as an admin, I would be pretty disappointed. I empathize where you are coming from but part of the literacy setup is to understand what you can and can not handle.

Most people do not make use of proper literacy standards. Especially when it comes to comprehension and long posts. They tend to lose focus and I agree there.

I think people need to bring it back to the components of grading literacy. Do research. Use grade averages rather than vague literacy standards. Literacy has levels and grades. I wish people utilized that a bit more. My mother was an English professor and so that really impacts how I use literacy standards.

I go by grades. High school graduate. Elementary. Post Secondary.
Grade 10, 11, 12

This is what I do.


So, if I ever have anyone join saying they have a comprehension of a grade 12 literacy and then preforms at an elementary school level. Yeah, I'm going to be disappointed. One, you were not truthful about your literacy standards, if you give me a heads up I like to work with people but if you lie it gives me a gross feeling. If you are just not trying or putting forth effort. Equally as frustrating and I will boot people for that. It's a deal-breaker for me. Because it does boil down to respecting literacy standards.

Part of literacy standards is also to push one's boundaries into becoming a better writer. Regardless of holdbacks. I too struggle very much from a brain injury but I don't let it impact my literacy standards.

 

[Maxx]

Use grade averages rather than vague literacy standards.

I've seen people use grade averages before, and in my opinion, that's worse and even more confusing than using literacy. Since not everyone is American and so won't understand what that means.

my brain when i see them

"I want to see high school standard literacy"
Me: ??????????

"This person only has elementary school level writing."
Me: ???????????????????????

"I expect a 12th grade level of grammar."
Me: ?????????????????????????????????????????? ??????? ???????????????????????????????????

As an English person, I have no freakin' clue what any of it means, lol. And also, it just reminds me of all the strict grammar rules English teachers say must be adhered to, like the one saying this sentence isn't grammatically correct since it begins with 'and'.

Of course I know there are non-Americans who do know what it means, but it'd be like if in a request thread of mine I decided to use the English schooling system to describe writing level, expecting everyone to have "a sixth form level of writing".

I hope that doesn't sound ranty; I've just woken up and am trying to get across what I think in a clear way, I'm not sure how effective it is right now, haha.

 

[nerdy tangents]

Honestly as an American I also have no idea what the grade levels mean. I haven’t been in school in 15 years and wasn’t a super engaged student even then. So you might as well use the British grade system as at least then I might be curious enough to ask how the British system work.

As an American I’m like lol I haven’t been in school in over a decade and I don’t care enough to ask you to clarify. Mostly cuz I’m not gonna be hanging with someone who wants me to relive my school days. I did it once and I’m good.

 

[Onmyoji]

For foreigners knowledge of English is assessed as pre-intermideate, intermediate, upper intermediate, advanced, proficient. How does that correspond to grades? No idea, as foreigners can study English outside of school and they can be an adult and still have very limited English.
And they can be "literate" in their native language but not very good at English, would that justify branding them as illiterate?
So that system can work in some cases but not for everyone.
But whatever works I suppose.

I just straight away say that English is not my native language and I make mistakes and write rp posts with Google translate XD

I much prefer "novella" and "shorter replies" gradation, or something along these lines.
As in, long posts or shorter posts. All of that can be literate, even one paragraph can be written well.

 

[Hella Downweather]

I personally use word count, as it's more accurate for me than paragraph count, or lit level. I know I can write comfortably 500-1000 words per hour, depending on inspiration and if I need to proofread on Grammarly/other spell checkers. And I know what amount I need from my partner to ensure I have enough to react/go off for my answer. When looking at other people search, I usually associate it with :

One liner - 50 words +
Semi-lit/Lazy lit - 250 words +
Lit - 500 words + - need Grammarly
Novella/Advanced Lit - 1000 words + - need Grammarly + additional proofreading

That's it. I'm pretty forward with the fact English is not my first language, and that my style is a reflection of the French way of writing. Now, I'm no Gustave Flaubert or Balzac with scenery descriptions taking over 80%+ of a RP, but it means I usually separate pretty clearly dialog from descriptions/the overall text, paragraphs tends to be on the smaller side than most of English lit, and I have no qualms using one sentence paragraphs to make a point.

And that's only French, we have people from all over the world here, who each have their own culture and way of writing (heck, even French lit from France doesn't have the same standards as French lit from Quebec...).

Soooo if you want people to use a specific way of writing with you, it's best to be explicit. And we see this all the time in the rules/requirements ! Like write in third person, past tense, or use proper grammar when writing etc...etc...You can open with the literacy level, to give an idea to your partner about how much you require from them answer wise, and if they need to proofread their answers. Then you go into specifics that annoys you/filter if you really only want to write with aspiring/established authors or if you really only want people to use third person in your Rps.

 

[nerdy tangents]

In a practical manner I have found writing samples have worked the best. So when I contact someone about doing a roleplay I will link a past roleplay (preferably one that got more then four or five posts in).

As I feel like just showing them what my writing looks like has been far more helpful to them then giving them arbitrary guideline. As a lot of the time it’s as much the feel of the writing then the over-all length.

I would rather shorter replies that actually engaged with the setting then longer replies where it’s basically just their character one upping mine for 500 words or more.

 

[Jannah]

Maybe it's just me, but I have a specific definition of "literate" which has little to do with actual post length. I'd say a couple well-written paragraphs (well-written as in proofread, proper grammar/spelling, and diverse vocabulary) is far more "literate" than a wall of text that is incomprehensible and adds little to the overall story.

 

[Hootle]

Why do people take literacy to mean how much one can write? And where do people here stand on that meaning of it, and using it in request threads?

I think it's because the word is misused on forum rpg sites that it has taken on another meaning. Instead of meaning the ability to read and write it has come to mean (to some forum writers) the length and skill of a person's writing ability which is wrong.
If you're on a roleplay site, you should be able to read and write. I think using literacy as form of describing how much you write is incorrect, but that's just me. If you really want to show people what can you do, the proof should be in your writing. Samples, etc.

 

[Jannah]

I think it's because the word is misused on forum rpg sites that it has taken on another meaning. Instead of meaning the ability to read and write it has come to mean (to some forum writers) the length and skill of a person's writing ability which is wrong.
If you're on a roleplay site, you should be able to read and write. I think using literacy as form of describing how much you write is incorrect, but that's just me. If you really want to show people what can you do, the proof should be in your writing. Samples, etc.

Exactly. Quantity does not always equal quality. Some of the best posts I've ever read have only been about a couple paragraphs long.