So, I chose to make a small writing census based on small bits of things that folk write, as I was just interested. I came out surprisingly high. Now, what I did was, I wielded the Automated Readability Index, which takes into account how many words each sentence of yours has (average) and how many marks each word of yours has (average). Exemple 1:

Democracy is a polytheistic ideology - the three biggest words make up 90% of the marks in the phrase. This phrase scored by itself in the ARI gives off 11,2. Higher scores mean less understandable; more wordy. (5 words to a sentence, 6 marks to a word)

Exemple 2:

I'm not a noob. - very short words, 1; 2; 3; and 4-marked words, making for an average of 2,5 marks for each word, and 4 words for each sentence. That's writing to a high level, so the ARI goes to -7,7 here (not kidding).

Without further ado, resultats and analyse.

https://snag.gy/MSGjuh.jpg

Angry Koala: 10,3
Epicular: 10,1
OttomanEmperor: 9,4
Knyte: 8,9
Zephyrum: 8,7
LeHappyMerchant: 8,1
Fizzer: 8,0
Juqtırw: 8,0
Death: 7,8
Adrijan: 7,0
Von Jewburg: 7,0
TeamGuns: 6,8
MyHandIsOnFire: 6,6
Eklipse: 6,5
Smedley Butler: 6,3
Greezantium: 6,3
DDB: 6,1
Felidae hivemind: 5,6
Leibstandarte: 5,2
Conservative: 5,1
OxTheAutist: 5,1
Bufalo: 5,0
JaiBharat: 5,0
GeneralPE: 4,3
Paugers: 3,3
SquigglesTheAdutti: 2,9
Belgian Gentleman: 2,5
Remove Kebab: 1,6
Sangheilian Fascist: 1,0
Minimal score possible: -16,2 (if everything you say is one mark long and you end the sentence there.A.A.A.A.A.)

So Sengrellian Facist takes the cake for most understandable. He likes to wield one word sentences, and doesn't generally like to be too wordy except for buzzwords. Despite wielding slang (which I personally dealed with as if it was one mark longer, as it was less understandable), his sentences are short, often just one word long.

"[bad name for jew]." (-2,1)
"I have kek'd." (-4,2)

Even when making rare long sentences, he keeps the words nice and trim.

"salt, also your autism makes you an easy target, maybe tone it down a bit." (4,3) (3,8 marks for each word, score of +4,2).

Of the Fascist block, they generally have scored high for understanding; Remove Kebab at 1,6; Paugers at 3,3; Leibstandarte at 5,2; and Adrijan being the least understandable at 7,0 (he did not like fullstops, his mispellings were many, and his grammerings were few).

Despite liking to wield big words that noone's heard of before (exacerbate. conondrum. exorciate.), they're still small and somewhat you can tell from what it is at context. His mothertongue is Arabish, so what can you do. He is a fan of magniloquence, but doesn't spam his magniloquence too much. It's just mainly negativity bias that makes us recall those episodes more.

It seems that I may be one of the best template makers. [1,4]
I'm not a swine you filthy imbecile. If I'm something then it's dexterous. (2,5)

On the other hand...

Case closed, typed by a strategic terminologist. (9,0)

So far-right in general seem to be more understandable. Or what the wordywords at highcom (of the English tongue) would say, very, not fop, not stupid, but "ignorant". Now, Angry Koala has been banned, I don't remember why, but he likely earned it.

In 2002, a gang of fullstops killed his mother and brother in front of his eyes. Ever since then, he has hated fullstops with a bane. Comma, sure; semicolon, sure, but fullstops? Naw. And he liked the sentences that would keep going off each other like a growing tree, so they ended up being very long, if not so wordy in it of itself.

Now knyte has the other kind of problem: decently short sentnces, awful wordpick. I mean - and I've told him this several times - he's what some would call "magniloquent". Has a faetish for Latin and French words especially "jus sangis" he refused to say bloodlaw. And he's practically Englishspeaking, so I mean, c'mon.

Now, the survery of myself came under the drunk writings of Chemistry is my SHITE. I like to write how I talk, especially for those writeups, so yeah, not much to say there. I really hate long words, and backstabber words, but I guess that is offset by, uh, my willingness to wield some filler speech while not boring, it does raise it up and make it unneededly long, but I think it gives a touch of the feller, so, whatever. But yeah, just these little words, like, uh, and kind of the same problem as Koala where I don't really know where to stop a sentence - perhaps even worse, y'know?

Zephyrum also likes long sentences.

Fizzer (my alt, as I've said before, and now proven by this datum), pretty long words and decently long sentences, so the worst of both.

Smedley, he doesn't like big words that much, either, and most of what he says comes in sentences made for a kind of shockvalue, f.e. taxation is theft, which are short, but have somewhat big words, or just in quite basic words explaining things in sentences ranging from medium to long.

OxTheArtist I think hits the sweetspot between having a tongue with slights, but also being very easy to understand. He's also Scottish, which means he's more prone to saying good Germanish words like "twitchel" (not alley) or "burn" (not river) or "burgh" (not city), though he kind of laughs of my thought of clean tongue. I mean the most understandable kind of fellow is the one that says A. A. A. A. A. But I mean, there's fully no meaning in that whatsoever - I guess what I try to say is, Ox hits the sweetspot where there's loads and loads of meaning (potentially) without being too underdetailled or wordy at all. Also a native English speaker - what several of those living from America (Greezantium, some Felidae, the fascist block) don't have the privilige to speak as their mother tongue.

Belgian Gentleman's level of speech however is good for other purposes: to send knowledge about something in a quick way. Most of what he did was written in kind of an update, either to his map, but it goes beyond just that. Belgian Gentleman is something that you might read in a routine military report. Not listing details that aren't really directly relevant to the readers, just stating close to what's bare truths.

Can analyse more folk, but please, only interesting ones.

Edited 9/16/2016 22:29:57

?? No genghis?

^ur irrlevent now, go home grandpa

Haha, I found this quite interesting.

interesting

Edited 9/16/2016 06:46:41

Too wordy. Didn't understand. Regardless, I will upvote your thread.

I see it. By the way, could you analyse my writing style? Thanks.

Edited 9/16/2016 10:37:39

get out.

If you want, perform an analysis on my writing style.

By the way, could you analyse my writing style? Thanks.

There's not really much to say, you like to wield somewhat normal, heavily (not over-)wielded words that folk know, with the but of a few buzzwords you may have heard from news and other things that aren't really relevant to you but interest you.

From this, we've learned Squiggles is not only a plagiarist, radical Islamist, all-around shitposter, and attempted to cheat the map voting system, but he's a conspiracy theorist. [16,8]

However, even these phrases with buzzwords are somewhat rare, and you do like to sometimes put sentences in a short bullet serie to try and overwhelm the fellow who has you in ire.

So Squiggles, what have you to say? Another proverb about birds? Your "dexterous strategy" will defeat me? Nitpick a single word I "used incorrectly"? [4,7]

Aside from really proper names and quotes from others, it's rare for you to wield some word above 8 words unless it's a twofold word (f.e. shitposter is pretty much 2 words: shit and poster).

get out.

-3,9 from these two words. There's not much meaning to these words, and so it's very very understandish.

Edited 9/16/2016 20:55:33

Well Kapy, care to analyze my writing? I feel that since Jewburg asked, I should I quirk to my own writing. This thread has indeed peaked my interest and thus further reasoning as to my inquiry.

Well, I can accept that. Thanks.

Interesting.

I would be rather curious to know what my score is.

Well, i want to know what my score is, its kind of interesting to see mine xp.

So the top spot goes to a fascist who rarely makes sentences longer than 5 words or discusses anything complicated. Is that really a good thing?

It's really the bottom result; not the top. The test is intended to determine the rough grade level one needs to be to understand a particular material.

ie. The contents of my post, not including this sentence, scores a 6.6 on the ARI, which equates to a 5th-6th grade reading level.

The Lord's post scores 6.7, also a 5th-6th grade reading level. This is not to suggest that either he or myself write at the level expected of a fifth grader, it means that the average fifth grader should be able to comprehend the meaning of our posts.

Edited 9/17/2016 16:52:06

Mmm, www

It's really the bottom result; not the top.

Like I said, the bottom has the most understandability, but the least meaning and nuances, while the top has the least, but the most nuances. Somewhere in the lower middle I think is what writing should generally be like.