Would that not mean general excitement on the part of the author?
I find it hard to analyze these things by numbers alone. It's context that really matters and if there truly is a baseline excitement, there really should be a high number of exclamations.
It can in moderation, but there's a phenomenon that people (often women) in communications overuse exclamation points, trying to come across as friendly and not assertive [1][2]. It's something I've noticed in my professional career, and not me trying to make a stereotype. You start to tip that usage too far, like 149 of them in a technical document, and it detracts from your content.
>A bunch of shader cores, which process triangles (vertex data) and pixels (fragment data) by running user-defined programs. These use different custom instruction sets for every GPU!
Why are different instruction sets exciting to the author? What does exclaiming that fact really mean for me as the reader? What I got out of it was the author was so surprised by this basic fact, that it was so out of this world unbelievable, that we also must be surprised by it. I'd rather read technical explanations with leadership/competence.
The intent I got was the idea of all the GPU instruction sets being different is notable, and perhaps unexpected and at the least challenging. The latter being an exclamation in the context of reverse engineering makes some degree of sense to communicate the fundamental difficulty inherent in this effort.
Now, we could go back and forth a few more times, invite friends and curious others to the party and end up with many different takes on this text.
What's the takeaway?
For me, it's lack of judgement. Content is king. I want to know what others mean to say and how they feel about it. I don't want to judge them on those things because what exactly is the point?
Make things better for me?
...better for people like me?
...people in general? Doubt that given the diversity of takes the experiment above would generate.
Waste of time. That's the takeaway.
And to press that idea home somewhat more, when I talk to other people, not text, but talking, I find diversity beautiful. Some are stoic. Some are bitter, jaded well worn solders. Others are excitable. Funny? Yup.
I submit you cost yourself more wondering why they don't conform than ever getting the answer is worth. Further, taking their intent in a more liberal, forgiving sense will get you to the good stuff others intend to share more quickly and efficiently. Plus, you might laugh a little.
I do. And it's enjoyable.
When I read the piece, I enjoyed feeling a bit of the joy, excitement, frustrations experienced by the authors and that amplified the good in all of it a little. Great! They did have one heck of an adventure after all.
Finally, you mention women overusing exclamation points. Maybe they are just being women? Just putting that out there.
I am pretty sure if we were to take a poll of those of us who are women as to whether being one is OK would trend to a definitive yes. The ones I know well tend to have a lot of fun and more colorful, rich relationships too. Kind of envy that personally.
I think it is OK to be a woman. After all, being a guy, I tend to be a guy. Why would women play it any differently?
Thoughts for you to consider.
Cheers! <-- Exclamation intended to convey a general upbeat mood, hoping it's catchy.
I'm not sure what your points are other than "people are different, get used to it." Surely there is room for different writing styles and perspectives in the world. That is really not what I was getting at. If that's what you took away from my comment, I would invite you to re-evaluate it.
>Finally, you mention women overusing exclamation points. Maybe they are just being women?
I did mention it, but I did not come up with this on my own. You can read the study I linked to. Calling it "women being women" sounds a bit like the old "boys will be boys" attitude, as if your gender defines your actions or is an excuse.
Instead I'd rather look at why a large group of people feel like they need to express themselves as upbeat and happy. If you read the study I linked to, it talks about this with explanation. I invite you to read some more.
It's a bit more subtle than that. Understanding others is important. Blanket "there is too much x" or similar kinds of observations leave out the actual person writing and the context.
I read the stuff, and have read other stuff related to this discussion. Have had some conversations with others too. Those conversations are where "Maybe they are just being women" comes from.
Suppose my response was rooted in the exclamation not always being up beat and happy. That's context related.
I find it hard to analyze these things by numbers alone. It's context that really matters and if there truly is a baseline excitement, there really should be a high number of exclamations.