Rate my Rant

[sobrique]

Periodically, one encounters rants on livejournal.
I think we all know what I mean. The diatribe about how a particular thing, be it person, subset of people, object, medium or ... well anything that could be called a 'thing'... really really sucks.

And I've seen good rants, average rants, and poor rants.

So here's a question for you.
What criteria do you use for judging a rant that you read?

Eloquence?
Accuracy?
Gratuitous use of swearwords?
Punctuation?

I'm thinking in terms of the scoring system you get at athletic events,
points for style, technical merit, artistic impression...

Comments

[warmage.livejournal.com]

IMO, punctuation, spelling, and proper grammar are very important when drafting or critiquing a rant. Eloquence and humor come into play when analysing the quality of similie and metaphor used within the rant. Lastly the opening and closing arguments should have the same overall meaning.

Swear words don't really seem to add to the overall quality of the rant but are useful for punching up specific comparisons. Overuse of swearing means you're just transcribing ME, and I'll devise some grevious bodily harm for you later...

[scarletdemon.livejournal.com]

Passion, swearing, blood-lust...I love all that. Accuracy? Meh.

[nuala.livejournal.com]

Passion, swearing, blood-lust...I love all that. Accuracy? Meh.

*giggle* Sounds more like really x-rated porn, right up to the accuracy part. Accuracy? "But baby! I'm a grower, just give me a chance!" "Meh."

[feanelwa.livejournal.com]

All the best rants contain:
- Silly yet spot-on metaphors and/or similes
- Use of the terms "argh" or "gaaah" to grasp the reader's attention
- Few or no mis-spellings, especially not of words that are used a lot of times in the rant
- Bad punctuation, most of all using commas without spaces,like this,it really gets on my nerves,you know.
- The style is important. The ideal ratio of argh/gaah to coherent reasons for the thing being crap is approximately 1:6.

[xarrion.livejournal.com]

Ideally, a rant should keep you reading, and if possible, agreeing/sympathising with the ranter. Eloquent and funny rants tend to work better for that very reason.

Inaccurate information, bad punctuation and gratuitous swearing just put the reader off, 'cos someone else just randomly mouthing off isn't worth the time or effort of wading through the text.

[katiger.livejournal.com]

Eloquence and grammar do it for me. I don't particularly care what they're ranting about as long as they do it with style.

[nuala.livejournal.com]

Well written (ie grammar, punctuation, etc), eloquence, sense of humor. Gratuitous use of swear words is completely optional. Otherwise, I'm far more likely to lightly skim & think, "Oh, that sucks!" and then move swiftly onwards. If you're going to rant, then it has to be entertaining, otherwise, you just sound like you're whining. Of course, accuracy IS a given, otherwise you just sound like you're whining about things you* know nothing about.

* "You" = "people in general"

[jorune.livejournal.com]

A critical difference lies in the intended audience. Rants can be written by a person who wishes to express their disgust at a 'thing' or alert people to a 'thing'. As such it can be 'this is what I am experiencing' or 'look at this'. As for rants in blogs I only read the blogs of people who I know or who touch on subjects that I am wholly interested in.

I am not interested in reading the verbal diarrhoea of meaningless strangers who are statistically insignificant dots on a digital sea. Tedious egotistas, victim tourists, I can happily live without.

[mightyaardvark.livejournal.com]

You can't mark a rant without an intimate understanding of the topic being ranted on and an ability to sympathise with the frustration of the ranter.