Sep 292012
 

It has been stated by many “web experts” that “passive language” and “passive speech” should be avoided, and that active language should always be used instead, so that more visitors can be attracted to otherwise dull websites. This idea has been carefully considered and contemplated by your humble servant, AKA me, but it wasn’t really obvious whether a greater benefit would be observed if only active voice were to be spoken here, with passive voice banned or at least avoided at all cost by the author. Nevertheless, the freedom of passive voice is considered by this writer as a consubstantial and indivisible part of the freedom of speech, and as it’s been known widely for some time, it has been endorsed by the National Society for Passive Voice, and has been submitted via our passive-aggressive lobbyists for further approval by the Senate and the Congress.

It hasn’t yet been anticipated by the writer of these lines whether my unprecedented love for passive voice would be despised by the visitors, and whether that would cause this site to undergo a lessening of daily hits due to the passive voice animosity exhibited by the “activist” visitors who may be in the majority, or whether perhaps a rise in the number of visits would be observed due to the number of supporting resident “passivists”. Hence, this experiment is being presented to you and it can be decided by you whether it would be good to stop getting barraged by passive expressions like this and instead get reverted and converted to an activism by usage of active voice. Anyway, having been patient enough to have this silly exercise thoroughly read by no one else but you, you are hereby being thanked.

 Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

(required)

(required)