Can you define structure?

Originally Posted by Babylon

I was gonna add a bit highlighting the subjective aspect, because it does bring the conversation to an interesting path. Yeah, its highly subjective. now I imagine if we asked every emcee here to define structure their definitions would at least echo some of my own sentiments but your point still remains-

So as a short side-bar what would you consider an example or two of objective mediums of voting to be? Aside from that yeah if youre using the word "structure" loosely or as a buzzword then it shouldn't be an objective medium on which to vote. but if youre providing enough of an explanation in conjunction with the usage of "structure" then I believe that adds to the objective template being built by the collective voterbase, and should be considered at least *fairly* objective.

I think that the most objective categorical models fall into the conceptualized techniques we've come to accept on the site as the "fundamentals." The things that have a pre-existing basis in reality, beyond out subjective perception of such that can be fallen back onto to evaluate them. Multisyllabics, punchlines, metaphors, etc. The aspects of writing which can be more empirically evaluated. Everyone knows what a punchline is, that it has a particular format. A set up, and an ending. Everyone can count a syllable. And these are things that have replicability among a populous for evaluation, because they have shared understanding and demonstrability.

Originally Posted by Babylon

I was gonna add a bit highlighting the subjective aspect, because it does bring the conversation to an interesting path. Yeah, its highly subjective. now I imagine if we asked every emcee here to define structure their definitions would at least echo some of my own sentiments but your point still remains-

So as a short side-bar what would you consider an example or two of objective mediums of voting to be? Aside from that yeah if youre using the word "structure" loosely or as a buzzword then it shouldn't be an objective medium on which to vote. but if youre providing enough of an explanation in conjunction with the usage of "structure" then I believe that adds to the objective template being built by the collective voterbase, and should be considered at least *fairly* objective.

I think that the most objective categorical models fall into the conceptualized techniques we've come to accept on the site as the "fundamentals." The things that have a pre-existing basis in reality, beyond out subjective perception of such that can be fallen back onto to evaluate them. Multisyllabics, punchlines, metaphors, etc. The aspects of writing which can be more empirically evaluated. Everyone knows what a punchline is, that it has a particular format. A set up, and an ending. Everyone can count a syllable. And these are things that have replicability among a populous for evaluation, because they have shared understanding and demonstrability.