Tis common courtesy, and, in fact, a matter of proper etiquette, that the subject of ones ire and great, unfettered disdain, is made known to himself and the general populace, in a manner or language simultaneously clearly, precisely and unambiguously, thus removing any doubt as to the intent of ones message.
Tis common couwtesy, awnd, in fact, a mattew of pwopew etiquette, thawt the subject of ones iwe awnd gweat, unfettewed disdain, iws made known tuwu himsewf awnd the genewaw popuwace, in a mannew ow wanguage simuwtaneouswy cweawwy, pwecisewy awnd unambiguouswy, thus wemoving any doubt as tuwu the intent of ones message.
“I have a vewy gweat fwiend in Wome called Biggus Dickus.”
Does he have a wife?
@grok translate that to american please
[Removed]
Haha I have pretty nice writing, so what I do when I write a proper name of some entity I don’t like is run my thumb over it to smudge it.
Frankly I think this is a style missing from the usual typographic emphases. Sure we’ve got
- bold for impact
- italics for notability
- underline for attention
strikethroughfor errata (closest one)
And combinations thereof. But where is the style of emphasis for ire?
I bemoan this typographical poverty, friends, for I have much which disgusts me of late, and I am so so so painfully petty.
No underline in CommonMark, that’s a link. Which isn’t underlined on my end because it’s not the 1990s, any more. U͟n͟i͟c͟o͟d͟e͟ ͟w͟o͟r͟k͟s͟… more or less. It’s a hack. 𝒞𝓊𝓇𝓈𝒾𝓋ℯ 𝓉ℯ𝓃𝒹𝓈 𝓉ℴ 𝓌ℴ𝓇𝓀 𝒻𝒾𝓃ℯ, 𝔞𝔫𝔡 𝔰𝔬 𝔡𝔬𝔢𝔰 𝔟𝔩𝔞𝔠𝔨𝔩𝔢𝔱𝔱𝔢𝔯.
