Does your Mylot discussion pass the SMOG test?

I suspect my vocabularizations shall categorically struggle like archetypical Hegellian titan cosmic opposites to escape the stigma of gobbledygook, or in short - No, I fail miserably

In some cases simple is the only way to go or lose people.

As a matter of interest, I entered the Guidelines text into an online 'SMOG' calculator from the University of Nottingham, which gives a 'readability' score rather than a score related to US school grades..(Actually, I think that it ought to be called an 'unreadability' value, since the higher the score, the less readable the text is likely to be!) The results were as follows: The SMOG index: 17 Total words: 648 Total number of polysyllabic words: 96 Total number of sentences: 40 This is somewhat depressing, since the same test applied to a number of editorials from British newspapers gives the following scores: The Sun: under 14 The Daily Express: under 16 The Telegraph and The Guardian: over 17 It suggests that only people who are capable of understanding the kind of prose found in the newspapers aimed at a well-educated British market might understand the most basic and essential of the documents here! In fact, it may not be a very fair comparison, since the text in the Guidelines is fairly short, is broken up into paragraphs and also contains repetitions of several polysyllabic words whose meanings are clear. I also ran the same test on the text of your discussion topic. The results were: The SMOG index: 15.4 Total words: 121 Total number of polysyllabic words: 13 Total number of sentences: 8 If you want to try it yourself, the site I used is:

I think that most of mine do pass. No big words or anything.

I try and use words that everyone will understand.

I like the KISS principle. But I also like to elaborate now and then, so there's some "book learnin'" added to the fun. I guess I'm thinking mostly about my classes right now as I write.

I honestly don't know how to speak (or write) gobbledygook. I know it when I hear it but I don't fly that way myself.

I love gobbledygook. But just because someone uses some bigger or less common words doesn't make the post incomprehensible. People should be able to get the meaning by context.

My discussions are plain and simple. I like them that way.. no Gobbledygooks for me.

@Jessicalynnt,This is the first time I have heard about SMOG test.

If I question that someone might not understand a word I give an explanation.

I like mine simple and short but that is just me!

Smog test! No, I have not used it to measure how complicated my writing is. .

I don't pass near the SMOG test to pass it. simplicity is brilliant.

I keep it simple. I like to make it fun too.

i do not need to test what I write here because there are as many thought processes as there are responses to my post Who can I please?

Sometimes I am misunderstood merely because if international differences well, I hope that's what it is.

I'd stick to KISS instead, but for "keep it short & simple", not stupid. I hope I'm at the low end of the gobledygook chart.

Well i'm not far behind you so we will have to just see where that ends up.