GoRight Style Guide for the English Language.
Overview.
This diary documents the conventions which comprise the GoRight Style Guide for the English language. This style guide is being developed using a differential approach to documenting specific style elements. In other words, this guide only seeks to document those elements which make the GoRight style unique.
For guidance on items not directly addressed by this guide, the GoRight Style remains explicitly agnostic with respect to other major style guides. As a result, a conforming document may adopt appropriate conventions from any number of other widely recognized Style Guides so long as (a) those conventions do not conflict with the conventions explicitly laid out below, (b) those conventions do not conflict with one another, and (c) those conventions are consistently applied throughout the document.
Section 1: Proper nouns referring to leftist political parties.
All written material which adheres to the GoRight Style Guide for the English language shall follow the convention of referring to the US political party which is comprised of individuals who identify themselves as "Democrats" as the Democrat party. The phrase "Democrat party" shall be recognized as a proper noun referring to that political party and the capitalization shall be exactly as shown.
Section 2: Proper use of the proper noun skymutt.
All regular references to skymutt MUST appear in all lower case letters (i.e. "skymutt"), and any other capitalization shall be considered pejorative. The following special cases exist:
- The proper noun skymutt can be properly used in all upper case letters within the context of an isolated title or sentence which is employing an ALL UPPER CASE style for literary effect.
- When responding to posts signed by skymutt which bear a red color bar at the time of the response one (or more) of the pejorative forms is required (e.g. "Skymutt", "SKYmutt" "Sky Mutt", or "sKY mUTT").
- For blog posts signed by GoRight, section 3 below shall still apply.
Section 3: Insertion and/or deletion of random letters, words, phrases and capitalization changes within blog posts.
All blog posts shall contain insertions and/or deletions of seemingly random letters, words, and phrases as well as seemingly random capitalization changes within the text in an effort to keep the reader focused on trying to discern the true message being conveyed by making them have to think about what the author actually meant to say. As such, these random anomolies shall not be construed to be typos or other types of errors.
Section 4: Blog posts with blue bars.
Any post with a blue bar must be written with the opposite sense from that observed in the real world. For example, up must be referred to as down. Hot must be referred to as cold, and so on. In addition, all conforming text will employ the principles of obfuscation and doublespeak.
- GoRight's diary
- Login or register to post comments

Comments :
GoRight's style guide collapses on itself:
and
Multi-word proper nouns like GoRight itself? Or GoRight Style Guide? :)
Yay, consistency!
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
Hmm, a fair point.
Refinement is in order. Although I don't consider GoRight to be a multi-word proper noun, GoRight Style Guide certainly would be.
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
Hey, no worries.
It took Strunk and White a lot of honing, too.
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
There, that should fix it.
Although it is more specific that I would have liked. Do you see any other inconsistencies in this version? I mean it is really important that we get this right! :)
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
Was about to ask "Why is Section 1 called 'Proper nouns'..."
But I can see that you are already on top of that critical detail-- very impressive!
skymutt: wise and powerful... enlightened...
We aim to please ...
and it is tough when you are on the cutting edge of literary evolution. Hey, where's Specter when you need him? This would be right up his alley.
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
See, we need more diaries like this
We get so caught up in the political horserace stuff, we never really focus in on the important issues! Thanks for dialing back in on what really matters!
:-)
skymutt: wise and powerful... enlightened...
Listen SKy mUtt ...
this IS an important issue. Besides, you do your part to keep things "dialed back" every day! He he. :)
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
If I ask nicely
...can I have my handle added to the style guide as all lowercase letters?
skymutt: wise and powerful... enlightened...
There you go, skymutt.
But note that I was careful to only afford you protection as long as you refrain from impersonating a red barred poster as you have been known to do from time to time! :)
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
Some languages distinguish different levels of speech
based not only on the audience but also on the speaker. Does the GoRight Style Guide have different applicability for different bar colors?
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
Hmm, this sound promising but I am not sure ...
what exactly you mean by "different applicability"? I suspect that there should be some rules which are related to the color of the bar over one's posts ... I'll have to think on that one a bit.
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
Japanese, for example:
there are different grammatically correct forms that are expected out of male speakers v. female speakers
. So a man would end a sentence one way, but a woman would end it another way.
I wouldn't suggest gendered language here, because it'd ruin experiments like Purpleface's. But barred language could be fun. Reds are expected to use more exclamation points, Blues tend to end sentences with ellipses, or whatever...
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
How about section 4 for example?
I like this meme and will think about how best to incorporate it ... I may keep my current attempt or I may abandon it in preference for someting more along the lines of what you have suggested.
Although my current attempt, while seeking to be humorous, does stray a bit from the traditional role of a style guide.
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
Nice!
Now that I've had a chance to review Section 2, however, it seems to dilute the all-important focus of the document, which is section one. Perhaps it would be best to strike that.
EDIT: or, as an alternative, you could generalize section 2 to apply to all posters-- capitalize a person's handle as they do, or else it is to be considered a pejorative.
skymutt: wise and powerful... enlightened...
This puts us in something of a bind
if we're attempting an all-caps line for stylistic reasons, yet bound to the strict precepts of Section 2:
Boom!
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
I think we can reconcile this without need for drastic amendment
The GoRight Style Guide only seeks to supplement existing conventions. Normally, it is convention that in an all-caps style, the use of capitals overrides any captialization styles that would apply in a mixed-caps style. GoRight does not explicitly override this convention. Therefore, BREAKING: LATEST DIARY FROM SKYMUTT DISCUSSES RECENT DEMOCRAT PARTY POLLING should be correct, I would think.
skymutt: wise and powerful... enlightened...
Actually, section (a) says the opposite!
Existing conventions, when they run into conflict with the GRSG, are subjugated to the GRSG!
Although with the new addition of Section 4, I'm not even sure what my comment means anymore.
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
LOL, perfect!
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
This bring me to an interesting tangent
I've done a litte research helping out my boss with a brief he's been writing regarding the extent to which national banks and their subsidiaries and affiliates in the title business can engage in the title insurance business. All I can say is that reconciling Gramm Leach Bliley with previous federal statutes and Ohio State Law is absolutely impossible unless you happen to know what the rules are for determining which statute applies when two statutes seem to be in conflict. And even people trained in the law come to different conclusions, it appears. I have new respect for lawyers after the experience.
So anyway, to bring it back to the very important matters at hand, I don't think that it's clear that GoRight's supplement actually overrides the universally accepted ALL CAPS style if we look at these styles as laws... can GoRight actually preempt what could be considered a universal standard? And if he can, is that standard considered to be overridden if he does not specifically acknowledge that universal standard and explicitly override it, even if certain parts of his style seemingly conflict with it? I would tend to say no if I view these styles as laws, based on my limited knowledge of the law.
skymutt: wise and powerful... enlightened...
...but now I see that the issue has been addressed explicitly
Once again, GoRight is ON TOP OF THINGS... at 5 AM EST no less! I'm normally up all night, i dunno what you guy's excuses are!
skymutt: wise and powerful... enlightened...
Sorry, we part ways there, skymutt.
Style Guides articulate guidelines, not rules or laws. There is no universally accepted style guide, and in fact there are many competing style guides out there. All of these present conventions (i.e. personal preferences of the authors) for things which lie decidedly outside the rules of grammar for the English language.
As a result I am free to define whatever I want in my style guide and it will stand on equal footing to any other style guide. I have chosen to write my style guide as an augmentation of the other styles as a matter of convenience ... but yes, my style guide can explicitly override any conventions espoused within other such guides. This is a fundamental aspect of my writing this as a differential definition relative to the other applicable style guides.
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
In theory, you can claim that
In practice, your style sheet is going to be woefully incomplete unless you inherit from certain basic widely accepted conventions. For example, without I can easily circumvent your style sheet by applying my own style that defines what a capital letter is as something other than the commonly accpepted definition, such as what is commonly accepted as a lowercase letter. If we really want to break it down, basic conventions, such as the use of the 26-letter latin alphabet and the left-to-right arrangement of charaters are also not contained here. I think you may have loopholes unless you agree to the idea of a generally accepted convention which you are building upon.
skymutt: wise and powerful... enlightened...
I do inherit from other style guides ...
in fact I explciitly inherent from any other style guide that some author who chooses to adhere to the GoRight Style Guide want to. The concept is that the author can choose any other guide that they want BUT anything that appears in my guide explcitly overrides any conflicting conventions in the other guides which are being utilized.
So, stated another way, anything that appears in the GoRight Style Guide must be adhered to in order to be considered a conforming document. For anything not explicitly mentioned within my style guide (i.e. those things I have no opinion about) I defer to the use of other guides but I explicitly exclude the use of any conventions found in those guides which conflict with mine (i.e. the rules found here take precedence over the rules found in any other guides upon which a particular document depends. I don't see how I can have it work any other way.
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
I rewrote Section 2 to clean it up a bit.
The previous version was too rambling. This version is direct and to the point and calls out a few special cases that will continue to apply.
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
On language:
This is probably the most powerful image for the evolution of language that I know:
That's the master, E.B.White. I love this idea of language as a well-trod path that we'd be good to follow for the sake of clear communication, but that we're free to stray from as the situation demands. As White was fond of saying, the only real rule to good writing is this: have a good ear.
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
I like that quote.
It is indeed a good metaphor for the development of language.
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree