Revolutionary Etude - aka Etude OP10No12

[chickenfried1]

Any advise on how to tackle this piece?  I'm just getting started.

Thanks in advance

[lojay]

1) Get off the computer.

2) Go to piano.

3) Put music on stand.

4) Learn the notes.

5) Come back and if you have any specific problems I'm sure someone will offer suggestions.

[vansh]

Eh might be better if you have specific questions. But overall, I'd say, work out the fingering well, and be sure to relax your left hand when you play. When I was learning it I didn't put too much thought into the fingering, and now I have issues because the fingers run into each other or my left hand gets tired quickly once I try to play fast. Also, I found that I could play it much faster when I'm actively reminding myself to relax the left hand and not let it tense up. But start it very slowly to build up good muscle memory for it.

[chickenfried1]

Oh, hi Lojay.  Didn't see your post until now because I had gotten off the computer and was too busy practicing.  I wudda put the music on the stand too, but I have a photographic memory so I didn't bother. Thanks for your helpful advise.

For the "someone"s who are willing to help,
How would you break this piece up to practice?
What are the most difficult elements/parts of this piece?
would be good particular questions, as well as any other helpful advise someone who has played the piece might want to offer. (Thank you vansh)

[pianoman53]

First of all: Realize that it should be "Op 10 no 12 - aka revolutionary" and not the other way around. Chopin himself never called it that....

Secondly: Practice slowly, with the correct movement. Playing slowly with control and musicality is always better than fast without neither.

[lojay]

From your post, it seems that you practiced everything but this piece.  There's no way you'd have these kind of questions if you actually put in some work on this.

Also, I don't get the point of the photographic memory comment, can you elaborate?  If you don't, the only thing I'm inclined to say is, pompous much?

Anyway, you seem to be missing the point of my post.  Your initial post was way too general for any specific advice.  Your follow up questions are just as general (especially evidenced by pianoman53's response).  I'll answer your questions anyway since I'm bored.

How would you break this piece up to practice?

Segmenting a piece for practice is mostly based on your own learning style and capabilities (something you might do may not work for me and vice versa).  This is easy work that should take you minutes to do and is a silly question to ask.

I'll just do the first two pages, since I'm lazy:
-measures 15-16

I don't see how knowing what I need to practice would help you.

What are the most difficult elements/parts of this piece?

For me (from a purely mechanical perspective), the passages similar to the measures I would practice above.

[chickenfried1]

No, I didn't miss the point.  I realized there was no point so I preceded to make fun of it.  The photographic comment was sarcasm. as should have been pretty obvious from the context.   If you read my original post you'd realize that I hadn't actually started practicing it yet. I'm coming back after a period of relative inactivity with the piano and was curious whether anyone had any helpful advice.

Also, because we're both members of the homo sapien race, presumably there might be some similarities between our cognitive processes.  Therefore, knowing what you need to practice might actually help me. If not, knowing what someone else needs to practice might help.  Who knows.  That what forums are for, group discussion.  I didn't specifically ask for your advice. 

[lojay]

No, I didn't miss the point.  I realized there was no point so I preceded to make fun of it.

There was a very clear point, which I guess eludes you: Problems are particular to the student.

My first 4 steps implied that you're not going to learn a piece by reading about it.

The photographic comment was sarcasm. as should have been pretty obvious from the context.  If you read my original post you'd realize that I hadn't actually started practicing it yet. I'm coming back after a period of relative inactivity with the piano and was curious whether anyone had any helpful advice.

So my suspicions are confirmed.    You're not pompous, just a prick.  I gave you the benefit of the doubt that you were a little kid that wasn't being sarcastic. Perhaps you're both a prick and a little kid?  I hope I make you cry.

For some reason, I actually assumed that you touched the piece a little bit from your initial post.  However, there were like 3 days in between your original post and your response.  I assumed that someone curious enough about a piece to make a forum post would actually go and spend some time on it.

Also, because we're both members of the homo sapien race, presumably there might be some similarities between our cognitive processes...

You've been upgraded from prick to douchebag now.

Anyway, by using the phrase "cognitive processes" you're implicitly acknowledging concepts from psychology.  If I remember correctly, according to Jungian psychology which first defined cognitive processes, people have differing levels of mastery over the various cognitive skills.  In other words: people learn differently.

With piano, in addition to differently developed cognitive skills, different people also have their own unique set of developed skill related to piano (e.g. octave technique, ability to comprehend a certain music langauge, etc.).  My point is, general questions and solutions (e.g. "What's hard about this piece?" or "How do you learn this piece?") do relatively little in helping you learn a piece.  Instead of asking, "Any advise on how to tackle this piece?", go and tackle it.

I mean my understanding of cognitive processes is quite superficial, but I think you take superficiality to a whole new level.

By the way, as a superficial douchebag prick you make a great addition to the forums, welcome!  You would think the statement is sarcasm, but it's not.  I love going on these drunken derisive rants, and posters such as yourself are perfect targets.

The more I think about it, calling you a prick would be redundant, so lets just call you a superficial douchebag.

[j_menz]

 If you read my original post you'd realize that I hadn't actually started practicing it yet.

Then start. At bar 1. Simple as that. Then Bar 2, then 3.....

Then, if you have difficulties, we have something concrete to talk about. Any difficulties you do have will be peculiar to you.

[chickenfried1]

lojay,

First off, lets be clear I realize this is no longer a forum but more a debate about psychology.
 

By the way, as a superficial douchebag prick you make a great addition to the forums, welcome!  You would think the statement is sarcasm, but it's not.  I love going on these drunken derisive rants, and posters such as yourself are perfect targets.

So um... thank you!  I too enjoy debating and as per my above comment will enjoy bashing heads with you - no sarcasm intended.  (On a sidenote, I am actually practicing the piece and when we get bored mb we can discuss that too)  I would ask that you keep the blatant insults to a minumum, but I guess everyone has their different styles and it will be interesting either way.

One point you keep harping on is that "problems are particular to the student."  You're definitely painting it too black and white.  Particular sure, but not exclusive.  By this I mean that there will be similarities between students.  Not between every student, obviously, but between student "a" and student "g" perhaps in a class of students "a"-"k".  While your input might be useless (your claim, not mine), that may not be the case with someone else's input.  I was just trying to get a general feel from other's prior experience, from which I could "take it or leave it" if you like.

Closely connected to this point is your point that "people learn differently."  Despite this you presume way too much about my learning style.

For some reason, I actually assumed that you touched the piece a little bit from your initial post.  However, there were like 3 days in between your original post and your response.  I assumed that someone curious enough about a piece to make a forum post would actually go and spend some time on it

I going to "assume" from the rest of the context that by "touch the piece," you actually meant "touch the piano".  That being said, I'll elaborate a little on my learning style.  I'm the kind of guy who likes to get the whole picture.  I like to do my research and make a general plan before I start.  (kind of like brainstorming/researching, writing an outline and then writing an essay)  Therefore, I'm not quite sure how posting a forum doesn't qualify as "spend(ing) some time on it."  There is nothing wrong with reading up or chatting about something before diving into it.  The fact that this is not your particular learning style is irrelevant.
Another thing I find interesting is your choice of words in insulting me.

So my suspicions are confirmed.    You're not pompous, just a prick.  I gave you the benefit of the doubt that you were a little kid that wasn't being sarcastic. Perhaps you're both a prick and a little kid?  I hope I make you cry

Seems just a little childish.  Irony, methinks?

Quote from: chickenfried1 on August 31, 2013, 12:56:58 AM
Also, because we're both members of the homo sapien race, presumably there might be some similarities between our cognitive processes...

You've been upgraded from prick to douchebag now.

Ok, granted.  That might have been a bit of a douchebag comment now that I look at it.  The point I was trying to make is that it very unlikely that we are so completely different in our mental activity that is no relation whatsoever.  Therefore it is probable that you would have some input valuable to me and visa versa.  Anywho, I never claimed not to be a douchebag(not saying I am either - I remain neutral on the subject of my own douchebaginess ), as you implied about yourself, so the irony still stands. 

[lojay]

One point you keep harping on is that "problems are particular to the student."  You're definitely painting it too black and white.
...

Judging from your response it's clear we should add f**ktard to the list.

You ask for advice on learning the piece.  My response to you was that problems are particular to the individual, so post with more specific questions.

Your goal is to learn the piece, correct?  Why not get advice that is tailored for you?

Since you're particularly thick headed, I'll elaborate.  Let me ask you, is it efficient to discuss the set of all problems a₁-a_n, when you only have problem a₂, a₁₂, and a₈₈₈?  Addressing all problems in general, whether you belong in class A which includes all students that have problems a₁,a₂,a₃, in class B which include all students that have problems a₃,a₄,a₄₂, or in whatever class you're actually in is a huge waste of time when we're offering to address the problems specific to you.

Getting an overview is fine, but this wasn't you seeking an overview; you were procrastinating.

Closely connected to this point is your point that "people learn differently."  Despite this you presume way too much about my learning style.
...

Now I'm convinced without a shadow of doubt about your superficiality.  You're taking my statement out of context with cognitive processes, but I'll address this statement anyway.

I find it hilarious that you claim I presumed anything about your learning style.  The only thing I have done is conclude you're an idiot due to the very convincing evidence in this thread. If I were to give you "advise" without asking for more information, I would be guilty of presuming to know about your learning style.

Your initial post and initial response contained a certain brusqueness and superficiality.  My initial response was warranted based on the quality of your post.

The fact that this is not your particular learning style is irrelevant.
...
I'm not quite sure how posting a forum doesn't qualify as "spend(ing) some time on it."
...

You consider writing the following 3 sentences spending time?

Any advise on how to tackle this piece?  I'm just getting started.

Thanks in advance

You didn't even spend the time to check your grammar.  Use advice properly ffs.  Seriously, what do you think a post like this says about the poster?

Another thing I find interesting is your choice of words in insulting me.  Seems just a little childish.  Irony, methinks?

I never claimed that I wasn't childish.  I would actually say I'm VERY childish!  Also, I'm a total prick.  Based on your response we could potentially remove douchebag from the list, however I prefer to escalate things:

I will always remember you as that superficial, douchebag, f**ktard that asked for advise.

[chickenfried1]

Hahahaha.  You're going to have to make me a t-shirt with all these names I'm getting.

With respect to the actual conversation , at least make an attempt to be consistent.

Since you're particularly thick headed, I'll elaborate.  Let me ask you, is it efficient to discuss the set of all problems a₁-a_n, when you only have problem a₂, a₁₂, and a₈₈₈?  Addressing all problems in general, whether you belong in class A which includes all students that have problems a₁,a₂,a₃, in class B which include all students that have problems a₃,a₄,a₄₂, or in whatever class you're actually in is a huge waste of time when we're offering to address the problems specific to you.

Getting an overview is fine, but this wasn't you seeking an overview; you were procrastinating.

You consider writing the following 3 sentences spending time?  

Am I wasting time, or am I not?  You can't have it both ways.  
Was I asking that we address "all problems?" Nope, I highly doubt that all possible problems would come up.  We're all human; there's only a limited # of things we can address.  That being said, maybe someone might point out a potential problem or musical attribute I would not have thought of (being thickheaded and all ).  As for procrastination, I think we can let me judge that.  As you yourself pointed out, I didn't spend a lot of time on the first post; did it amount to procrastination?  Probably not.  You'll have to elaborate on your rationale there.

I'm not sure what it is, I guess you just have a tendency to look at music in a very confined, mathematical (not quite the right word, but can't think of the right one right now) manner, like there's a set grocery list of things I have to check off.  Or at the very least, you are a proponent of rigid militant efficiency.  Not exactly a very musical perspective.
This might be a characterization of you; maybe you're actually genuinely concerned about me and others wasting our time.  But if you're concerned about your precious time, then why waste time responding?  

I never claimed that I wasn't childish.  I would actually say I'm VERY childish!  Also, I'm a total prick.  Based on your response we could potentially remove douchebag from the list, however I prefer to escalate things:

I will always remember you as that superficial, douchebag, f**ktard that asked for advise.

Um, who's bringing superficial to a new level now?

I could go on, but I don't want to stretch your attention span to too great lengths otherwise you'll get distracted and just start making mindless insults again.

Yours truly,
The douchebag, and so on and so on and so on..

[lojay]

It seems that you have a tendency to take things out of context and simplify in an attempt to make a point.  Perhaps it's just not obvious to you, but you're reaching...

For example, you ending your post like this:

Um, who's bringing superficial to a new level now?

I could go on, but I don't want to stretch your attention span to too great lengths otherwise you'll get distracted and just start making mindless insults again.

clearly shows that you ran out of things to state.  If you could go on, why not go on?  It's not about MY attention span, it's about YOUR attention span.

You still haven't addressed why you took what I stated about cognitive processes out of context nor the advise issue.

How are my insults mindless? Every insult has been completely warranted; in other words,  I've justified every insult.  Should I re-quote the previous posts?

With respect to the actual conversation , at least make an attempt to be consistent.
...
Am I wasting time, or am I not?  You can't have it both ways. 

You claim I'm inconsistent, but this is a pretty big stretch.

Procrastination - To postpone or delay needlessly.

How can you claim that you're not procrastinating?

Your goal is to learn op. 10 no. 12, correct?
How is spending time on a forum not procrastinating?  You claim to be "getting an overview", but what are you really doing (or not doing in this case)?  You're NOT learning op. 10 no. 12.  You might have only wrote 3 sentences (in other words you initially didn't procrastinate much), but what about the time spent coming back to this thread, reading the responses, and replying (like you are right now!).

Anyway, for me, getting an overview in the context of learning a piece would be reading through the piece (by reading, I mean sight reading and playing through) and analyzing the piece.  You could perhaps make an argument for listening to recordings and watching a performance, but for me this is borderline procrastination.

If you don't think you're reaching and bullshitting here, you're delusional.

Was I asking that we address "all problems?"

No, but you were asking about all potential problems.

I'm not sure what it is, I guess you just have a tendency to look at music in a very confined, mathematical (not quite the right word, but can't think of the right one right now) manner, like there's a set grocery list of things I have to check off.  Or at the very least, you are a proponent of rigid militant efficiency.  Not exactly a very musical perspective.

First, I lol'd when I read, "rigid militant efficiency"; you definitely meant military (there's f**ktard within coming out again).  I'm all about efficiency, but probably not "rigid military efficiency"; this is such a half-assed and weak attempt at insult.

Anyway, who is being presumptuous now?  You do realize, you initially modeled the example I used; I just further clarified so there wouldn't be any ambiguity.

In your reply, you previously stated that the number of problems are not infinite and that you would only have a certain subset of all problems.  Why not approach the problems you encounter when learning a piece and mentally make a list or problems you need to address much like a grocery list of things you need to check off?  I personally do this.  Claiming that this is not a musical perspective is reaching and superficial (you're not making any inferences).

This might be a characterization of you; maybe you're actually genuinely concerned about me and others wasting our time.  But if you're concerned about your precious time, then why waste time responding?  

I could care less about myself and others wasting time on these forums.  I procrastinate all the time and I don't mind; however, I still get everything I need and want done.

It's been about 2 weeks, have you learned op. 10 no. 12 yet?  Based on your responses and your approach I doubt you'll learn this in a reasonable time.  Prove me wrong, but I'd bet you'd spends months on this etude and still suck at it.

[gyzzzmo]

@chickenfried

There's not much point in giving advice since we dont know what the problem is. You should just start learning the piece and tell us wich difficulties you encounter, because different people have different problems with this piece

[lojay]

Guys, let's stop picking on the delusional, superficial, douchebag, f**ktard that asked for advise.

You would think I'm just mindlessly insulting you, but I'm not.  I'm reiterating a point so the f**ktard in you doesn't forget.

[swagmaster420x]

How is spending time on a forum not procrastinating?  You claim to be "getting an overview", but what are you really doing (or not doing in this case)?  You're NOT learning op. 10 no. 12.  You might have only wrote 3 sentences (in other words you initially didn't procrastinate much), but what about the time spent coming back to this thread, reading the responses, and replying (like you are right now!).

written* 3 sentences, you ignorant savage.

[swagmaster420x]

Anyway, by using the phrase "cognitive processes" you're implicitly acknowledging concepts from psychology.  If I remember correctly, according to Jungian psychology which first defined cognitive processes, people have differing levels of mastery over the various cognitive skills.  In other words: people learn differently.

i doubt theres a cognitive skill in the brain that specifically determines your ability to play arpeggios, one that determines your ability to play trills, one that determines your ability to play scales. so, in terms of piano technique, people don't learn differently based on jungian psychology. unless playing arpeggios and playing trills are controlled by distinct cognitive areas. (which seems retarded, l0l)

pls go bak to barbairan land wher u andur horridgrammer and uninformd oversimplications will fitin with sositey.

jk

[swagmaster420x]

In your reply, you previously stated that the number of problems are not infinite and that you would only have a certain subset of all problems.  Why not approach the problems you encounter when learning a piece and mentally make a list or problems you need to address much like a grocery list of things you need to check off?  I personally do this.  Claiming that this is not a musical perspective is reaching and superficial (you're not making any inferences).

first of all, it should be "number of problems is not infinite"
and second of all, if you wanted to get all mathematical up in this bi tch then you should have noted that infinity is not an actual number
so even if you were grammatically correct and had typed, "the number of problems is not infinite"
that would basically be a useless statement; the number of problems can never be infinite because no number is infinite.

plsgo bak 2 presk0l for idots retrdeddevelopmnt l0L

[swagmaster420x]

pls resppond im llonely

[j_menz]

[swagmaster420x]

omg <3
srs doe , chikenfriedseems funny and lojay is funny as usual , this place is a f cuking playground yo

[lojay]

written* 3 sentences, you ignorant savage.

Wrote is active while written is passive.  Should I elaborate?

Who is ignorant now?

[lojay]

i doubt theres a cognitive skill in the brain that specifically determines your ability to play arpeggios, one that determines your ability to play trills, one that determines your ability to play scales. so, in terms of piano technique, people don't learn differently based on jungian psychology. unless playing arpeggios and playing trills are controlled by distinct cognitive areas. (which seems retarded, l0l)

pls go bak to barbairan land wher u andur horridgrammer and uninformd oversimplications will fitin with sositey.

jk

I am seriously wondering if you're retarded.

[perfect_pitch]

I am seriously wondering if you're retarded.

I'd say schizophrenic. Some of his comments seem to have merit and better grammar, and some of the posts look as if he typed it while he was plastered.

[lojay]

I'd say schizophrenic.

I think you hit the nail on the head.

[swagmaster420x]

Wrote is active while written is passive.  Should I elaborate?

Who is ignorant now?

U  r , fucing idot. Writen is participle whichj is used in conjunction with has. U said mite have wrote, which is essentially trying to splice perfect present with preterite which obv doesnt work and os wrong the corect conjugation is might have written activr and passive has little to do with partigiples. This is cominf from someone wgo hgot a perfec score on grammar section of national aptitudet test u peasnat plx return to siberia idot

[swagmaster420x]

I am seriously wondering if you're retarded.

Ur basikly insulting urself cuz that means u potentially have a worse understanding of psychology than a retard

Also ur failure 2 respons 2 my math coment means u have conceded defete 2 my superior intelect, u uncouth cur

[outin]

Either someone has a keyboard incompatibility issue or is in need for typing/grammar lessons...

[mjames]

This thread is gold. Hehe.

[swagmaster420x]

Either someone has a keyboard incompatibility issue or is in need for typing/grammar lessons...

My typing wpm is 99th percentile, 100th if u round to the nearest whole percentile. Plus i thot it s already been established that i have gotten a perfect score on the grammar section of a national aptitude test, so i am lacking in neither of those areas. Please dont rush to hasty conclusions about people u dont know, there is in fact an adjective for that its called faggot .

[j_menz]

u have conceded defete 2 my superior intelect

I've generally found that people with a superior intellect can at least spell it.

[h_chopin148]

This thread isn't really about the Revolutionary etude anymore... 

[swagmaster420x]

I've generally found that people with a superior intellect can at least spell it.

what makes you think I can't spell it? just because i spelled something wrong in one instance doesnt mean that I am actually incapable of spelling it correctly. jesus, u people came  strate from the nazigovernment of judgmental fages

[perprocrastinate]

This thread is gold. Hehe.

This is probably the best thread ever. I had my fun reading it over and over and over.

[j_menz]

This is probably the best thread ever. I had my fun reading it over and over and over.

 

[chickenfried1]

Wow!  Just Wowww.  Was planning to respond to lojay, but I'm a little overwhelmed by the hilarity of this thread.  So, yes you might say I'm procrastinating, that is with respect to responding.    Or at least procrastinating with respect to procrastination.  I mean, why put it off?  Procrastinate now!  I'm a little curious how I'm schizophrenic though.  Not denying it, just curious.  Can I have some examples, @perfect pitch (or lojay since you apparantly know what he's talking about)?

[swagmaster420x]

Wow!  Just Wowww.  Was planning to respond to lojay, but I'm a little overwhelmed by the hilarity of this thread.  So, yes you might say I'm procrastinating, that is with respect to responding.    Or at least procrastinating with respect to procrastination.  I mean, why put it off?  Procrastinate now!  I'm a little curious how I'm schizophrenic though.  Not denying it, just curious.  Can I have some examples, @perfect pitch (or lojay since you apparantly know what he's talking about)?

please say what you were going to say to lojay, so he has more incoherent, childishly childish (meta-childish) content to make fun of

and by childishly childish i mean ur being childish, except retarded

[outin]

  I'm a little curious how I'm schizophrenic though.  Not denying it, just curious. 

I'm confused...are you swagmaster as well? Multiple personalities?
We have some on this forum already...

[swagmaster420x]

I'm a little curious how I'm schizophrenic though.  Not denying it, just curious. 

I'm a little curious how I can't correctly understand english. Not denying it, just curious.

[lojay]

Procrastinate now!  I'm a little curious how I'm schizophrenic though.  Not denying it, just curious.  Can I have some examples, @perfect pitch (or lojay since you apparantly know what he's talking about)?

Clearly, that wasn't directed at you lol.

I'm not even going to bother with swagmaster420x.  Full troll. 

[swagmaster420x]

Clearly, that wasn't directed at you lol.

I'm not even going to bother with swagmaster420x.  Full troll.  

At least I know basic grammatical rules, you ignorant swine.
A wise philosopher once said that people ignore that which vexes them the most because thetyre retarded.

[outin]

At least I know basic grammatical rules, you ignorant swine.
A wise philosopher once said that people ignore that which vexes them the most because thetyre retarded.

Knowing the rules seems irrelevant if you are not using them to make yourself understood...

[swagmaster420x]

The sayings of trolls are merely truths wearing the disguise of truths.

[awesom_o]

I just wanna hear some badass playing of this epic Etude!

swagmaster can you hook me up?

[wwalrus]

At least I know basic grammatical rules, you ignorant swine.
A wise philosopher once said that people ignore that which vexes them the most because thetyre retarded.

You're missing a subordinate conjunction in your dependent clause. Because I, at least, know that you don't know anything about grammar, I can make fun of you.

[wwalrus]

My typing wpm is 99th percentile, 100th if u round to the nearest whole percentile. Plus i thot it s already been established that i have gotten a perfect score on the grammar section of a national aptitude test, so i am lacking in neither of those areas. Please dont rush to hasty conclusions about people u dont know, there is in fact an adjective for that its called faggot .

He's lying. It's obviously all made up, so why are we even trying to respond to him?

Seriously, you guys have no sense of when someone is trolling you. With a name like "swagmaster420x," you guys continue to even respond to him. I feel like the responses i got in my "suggestions for advanced pianist" are echoed throughout this whole forum.

[swagmaster420x]

He's lying. It's obviously all made up, so why are we even trying to respond to him?

Seriously, you guys have no sense of when someone is trolling you. With a name like "swagmaster420x," you guys continue to even respond to him. I feel like the responses i got in my "suggestions for advanced pianist" are echoed throughout this whole forum.

im not lying... and every single comment i've made in this thread is based on truth; everything i've said makes logical sense as well. it's just that the purpose of everything i'm posting in this thread, which was pointless from the very beginning, was to get a response out of someone, so you guys consider me a troll (which is valid).

anyways, proof: https://i.imgur.com/1M4eODW.png   https://i.imgur.com/jFqEkKz.png

i'm honestly flattered you think i'm lying, and i'm also overjoyed because u gave me another chance to bamboozle a feeble minded imbecile (in case you didn't notice, im referring to you).

(unless ur trolling about thinking that im lying.... in which case go back to 4 chan).

[wwalrus]

Ok, you're right. I was wrong about you lying, and most of the people in this thread were wrong about your history.

However, that was your history, and this is your present. In this thread, your spelling has been sh*t (I honestly don't believe taking two characters off of the word "you" will be such a big problem for you in terms of time), with numerous typos. If you're not going to be consistent, then your tests really don't mean anything because they don't apply to you, given your inconsistency.

Based on your wpm score and your accuracy, there would be no reason that you'd have to shorten any words at all; it would be so easy to type that it wouldn't matter whether you shorten the words or not.

You're a joke.

[wwalrus]

Also, what's your steam? :3

[swagmaster420x]

Also, what's your steam? :3

^^ i play LoL, add me on "i phacd ur mom"
my steam is imurslave, but the only game i have on it is dota 2 which i hate

i type like trole bcuz thats how everyone in dota 1 typed, i used to fiend that sh*t

the very incoherent/mistyped posts were cuz i was typing on my friends iphone