Another word that needs to die

by Grania

Today’s word is “ratio”.

No, not the actual ratio.

The social media ratio, as in “I’m just here for the ratio.”

What does it mean?

It means that the number of “comments” far exceed the number of “likes”, which means you are bad, you fail, even your mother is embarrassed about it and your friends will now pretend not to know you. Actual conversation is frowned upon, clicking a heart button is what really matters.

Such a person is “ratioed.”

 

 

You’re welcome. See also, “Hold my beer”, into which category this tweet would also fit.

 

 

33 Comments

  1. Dominic
    Posted May 23, 2019 at 10:07 am | Permalink

    The Chapters on Jerry’s word dislikes are going to take up the bulk of his biography! 🙂

    That is a new one to me – & very ugly.

  2. yazikus
    Posted May 23, 2019 at 10:21 am | Permalink

    I recently was having a piece of jewelry cleaned and ended up waiting for a few minutes in the store. I overheard a couple grousing about a ring, and their financing options. After they left, I asked the clerk what percentage of folks financing their jewelry buys and they said probably 95%. I find this simultaneously horrifying and curious.
    I don’t wear jewelry myself, so this may be my personal bias showing. It just seems unreasonable (and fiscally irresponsible) to me to be buying fashion pieces that you cannot afford without financing.

    What say the good readers here? Am I being short sighted?

    • norm walsh
      Posted May 23, 2019 at 11:05 am | Permalink

      Yea, fully agree,kinda like buying that Ram 1500 truck on time instead of saving for your retirement.

    • Posted May 23, 2019 at 12:24 pm | Permalink

      Engagement and wedding rings might be a reasonable exception.

      🐜

    • Christopher
      Posted May 23, 2019 at 6:13 pm | Permalink

      I don’t wear jewelry either, and I am what you might call “terminally single” as well as perpetually impoverished, so engagement rings are not items upon which I ruminate. However, I cannot for the life of me understand the point of them or their excessive cost, not to mention dubious moral baggage, but I am all for them going the way of the dowry and the bride-price.

    • Diana MacPherson
      Posted May 23, 2019 at 7:13 pm | Permalink

      No I think it’s stupid too but some people really go for that kind of conspicuous consumption. I’ve known people who insist on $8K handbags, mansions to live in, fancy cars, expensive jewellery and they jealously watch all those around them to make sure they have more.

      I can’t even spend a few more bucks on the stainless steel Apple Watch. I like nice things but let’s not go overboard.

      • infiniteimprobabilit
        Posted May 23, 2019 at 8:30 pm | Permalink

        I agree it’s daft.

        My watch is a Casio. Digital (because I think digital makes complete sense for watches, even though I strongly prefer dials for some applications like car instruments). Tells me the day and month (not the year, I can usually remember that). Cost $35 in the days when that was the equivalent of $70 now. And it just won’t die, though I’ve replaced the strap twice.

        Apple watch? That’s just something else to lose.

        cr

        • Posted May 23, 2019 at 10:29 pm | Permalink

          Although I do not wear jewelry and throughout
          most of my life have worn inexpensive watches, I now have an Apple 4 watch for the health features. I have AFIB and can send ECGs to my cardiologist. I can monitor my heart rate. And, if I fall my watch sends a message to emergency services and my children. I recently fell and the watch worked as designed.

          • infiniteimprobabilit
            Posted May 24, 2019 at 4:40 am | Permalink

            Ah, so it’s a bit more than just a watch? Okay…

            cr

          • Diana MacPherson
            Posted May 24, 2019 at 8:49 am | Permalink

            I was miming how I wanted to punch someone and my watch thought i had a hard fall. I also was rough housing & patting my dog & it thought the same. So, I think I’m a bit violent in my gestures sometimes. 🙂

            • infiniteimprobabilit
              Posted May 25, 2019 at 7:16 am | Permalink

              I deduce from that that you do have an Apple Watch but it comes in a stainless version and a non-stainless version and you have the latter?

              (Not what I thought from your first comment, which was that you didn’t have one)

              cr

              • Diana MacPherson
                Posted May 25, 2019 at 9:24 am | Permalink

                No I have an Apple Watch. I have the series 4 and had the series 1 before it. I had several Pebble watches prior until that company went bust and decided that the Apple Watch was the best for me since I have an iPhone.

    • Posted May 25, 2019 at 6:10 pm | Permalink

      I fear that the prices of these rings (and of weddings generally) discourage people from marrying.

  3. W.T. Effingham
    Posted May 23, 2019 at 10:26 am | Permalink

    Some kids on crotch-rocket motorcycles appear to have a “scary” high horse-power over I.Q. ratio.

  4. Posted May 23, 2019 at 10:29 am | Permalink

    I’m a bit puzzled: does the tweet about the engagement ring demonstrate ratio”?

    • Terry Sheldon
      Posted May 23, 2019 at 10:35 am | Permalink

      If I’m reading the screenshot correctly, the tweet has 11,000 comments and 648 “likes”, or a “ratio” of about 17:1.

    • Jenny Haniver
      Posted June 11, 2019 at 5:41 pm | Permalink

      I was thinking the same thing.

      Since the number of comments about engagement rings, jewelery and watches far exceeds the number of comments about the word “ratio” re social media, I guess you’re “just here for the ratio”

  5. Silvia Planchett
    Posted May 23, 2019 at 11:16 am | Permalink

    How about English as a second language

    • Christopher
      Posted May 23, 2019 at 6:08 pm | Permalink

      I believe Robin Williams once said that the purpose of alcohol was to make English your second language, but sadly I have no idea what he thought about idiots on social media.

  6. Randall Schenck
    Posted May 23, 2019 at 12:08 pm | Permalink

    Check out this ratio. During the first quarter of 2019 Facebook banned 2.19 billion fake accounts. The number of genuine accounts on Facebook is said to be 2.38 billion. For those living on this platform I would be careful what you believe.

  7. Mark R.
    Posted May 23, 2019 at 1:02 pm | Permalink

    The silliness of social media never disappoints.

  8. Mark Sturtevant
    Posted May 23, 2019 at 1:11 pm | Permalink

    In a tiny way the tweet illustrates a modern form of sexual selection in our species.

    • Diana MacPherson
      Posted May 23, 2019 at 7:16 pm | Permalink

      Someone had replied that the guy was lucky to have her dump him so there is that too. I honestly can’t imagine demanding a certain gift from someone like that. I would find it embarrassing.

  9. Roger
    Posted May 23, 2019 at 2:14 pm | Permalink

    Because they don’t have downvotes. Next best thing in lieu of downvotes: ratio.

  10. Matt Foley
    Posted May 23, 2019 at 3:19 pm | Permalink

    Please explain ratio. If it’s bad then why would someone admit “I’m here for the ratio”? And how does the screenshot demonstrate ratio?

    • Steve Gerrard
      Posted May 23, 2019 at 3:44 pm | Permalink

      The screenshot shows many more comments than likes (11,000 comments, 648 likes).

      A high ratio of comments to likes is taken to reflect badly on the original poster, since twitter users are far more likely to comment on things they don’t like, because twitter is all about complaining.

      A person with nothing else to say who wants to increase the comment count writes “I’m here for the ratio” as their comment.

    • Roger
      Posted May 23, 2019 at 4:58 pm | Permalink

      It’s like a downvote. Except twitter doesn’t have downvotes so they thought of another way to count “downvotes”.

  11. infiniteimprobabilit
    Posted May 23, 2019 at 8:21 pm | Permalink

    Another phrase that should be killed:

    ‘needs to die’.

    *It* (whatever it is) doesn’t need to die, it’s quite happy, thank you, basking in the trendy adulation of the brain-dead masses.

    It’s *we* who need it to die, urgently, screaming as it disappears into the black hole of Last Year’s Trendz, never to be perpetrated again.

    😎

    cr

    • infiniteimprobabilit
      Posted May 23, 2019 at 8:47 pm | Permalink

      I should generalise that – I’m nitpicking about the whole trend for saying anything ‘needs to’ do something, when we really mean ‘we need it to’ (or ‘we want it to’). That’s got the whole meaning completely reversed.

      This is niggle #2548 on my little list…

      I need to get a life 🙂

      cr
      (How’s my ratio?)

    • Posted May 25, 2019 at 3:40 am | Permalink

      “Needs to die” needs to die. 😉

      -Ryan

  12. Charles Sawicki
    Posted May 24, 2019 at 8:29 am | Permalink

    Just another way in which social media are largely stupid, cruel and vacuous.

  13. Stephen Wilson
    Posted May 24, 2019 at 1:49 pm | Permalink

    If that thread is real, the poor guy needs to dump HER. She’s a narcissistic bitch.

  14. Posted May 25, 2019 at 3:41 am | Permalink

    I’m here for the ratio.

    No, not the comment-to-like ratio. The surface-area-to-volume ratio.

    -Ryan


%d bloggers like this: