![]() |
theres two types of txt battlers ppl who type shit as if they was saying it, and more intricate txt heads who have a "Read only" style
both are dope imho We are reaching a point where everyone ISNT using the same style for once and I applaud that |
^^^this
|
Quote:
For example, on your first point.. I view txt as a means to an end.. But also realize that it's txt.. Sooo, I'd say that txt wp doesn't have to be "as cool with" or "perfectly built for" audio.. but it should also Never "fuck up" the phonetics or be such a stretch as to make things awkward.. as far as my opinion on those 2 examples, I'm just not feeling the first one by joog.. I think it sucks (although it's technically sound).. And no offense to joog I'm sure he has plenty of examples of "good" wp.. but in my view this isn't one of them. if it's corny it better be pretty dang funny and/or clever, and i am just not amused by that example. the second example by Un is fine for txt without screwing up the flow or phonetics. granted i did have to try it a couple different ways but i think that's mainly cuz i kinda suck.. But anyway, it's kinda clever and "not as stretchy".. so i don't have a problem with it; but i also wouldn't cite it in a vote and be like "Omg he merked with that wp gotta give a major boost to the verse bcuz of it".. more like a "bit of seasoning" (that being a dope metaphor, with the meat of the verse being the main ingredients).. anyway.. again,just my opinions |
My Wyatt line was a perfect recent example of excellent wordplay usage.
Poison Sumac would be the opposite recent example. |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:23 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.