still in hell😜

Tempting Inspiration

President Donald Trump’s name changes to geographical landmarks and the technological implications are the “inspirations” and inspirations of this project. Just so ya know.

Google Map users in the United States see Trump’s “rebranding” of the southern as the “Gulf of America.” Google Map users in Mexico still see “Gulf of Mexico.”

We wonder: Would this be rhetorical“he-who-shall-not-be-named”?

X

are popups the antithesis to he-who-shall-NOT-be named?🧙

Teasing Inspiration

In Alaska, President Trump re-renamed North America’s largest mountain, which was called Mt. McKinley, then got changed to “Denali” by Presient Obama in 2015 as a way to, well, respect indigenous Alaskans before his visit. Then it got “rebranded” by Trump as Mt. McKinley again, again.

Ya gotta wonder if Google Maps will show “Denali” to Alaska’s indigenous peoples (the name they prefer), and Mt. McKinley to everyone else.

We were like: Could this count as rhetorical he-who-shall-not-be-named?

X

the end is a looooong way away⏳

Realigning Inspiration

President Trump’s “rebranding” (wonder why we used that word? go ahead. ruminate cuz we don't go any deeper😚) echoes the ease with which AI LLM can be “executive ordered” or can rearticulate content for users.

We thought: Should this be considered a form of rhetorical he-who-shall-not-be-named?

X

can ya guess what, why, when, how 🤷

he-who-shall-not-be named?

Our BIG idea is that there is a “malefunction”—a kinda white, patriarchal bend—that rhetorical he-who-shall-not-be-named can take when interfaces be customizin.

At any rate, if you are a believer in Burkean rhetoric, cuz he still a pretty BIG name, then think about it like this: Instead of identifying a with b to set the stage for persuasion, where a relates and/or associates his/her/their ways with b’s, a just identifies with a¹⁰⁰. Catch our drift? CustomizationPlusExtremeHighDefinition rhetoric and politics. We mean with all the different things that can be done with text—like thinkin' about it as procedure and identification—not just persuasive, then, well, why not play with it! Why not figure out how author and audience fit and work with with he-who-shall-not-be named?

We just got really intro and extrospective: Dare an interface be rhetorical he-who-shall-not-be-named?

X

no end to popups but near the BIG reveal 🎁

Tempted, Teased, Realigned

Point is: Rhetorical he-who-shall-not-be-named is a tempting ideal. Technologies tease though, making what seems he-who-shall-not-be-named to be anything but. For rhetorical he-who-shall-not-be-named to really work there has gotta be some kind of rhetorical and ethical alignment: a framework that works depending on context to realign and take into account that malefunction of a identifying with only a. Or author identifying only with audience and verse vice.

So our interface is rhetorical he-who-shall-not-be-named taken to extremes, extremes in meaning, reading, authoring, citation, a little plagiarism, and textual customization and, well more. It's all in an effort to figure out what rhetorical he-who-shall-not-be-named dare mean and should mean.

Ok—we're gonna name, but it’s a little frightening in the current political environment, so appreciate our courage: “equity” is he-who-shall-NOT-be-named.

X

can you handle this or are you getting angry? please don't quit yet!🙏🏼

Tempting Styles

We are going to be really, really, really “cheezy.” Taste the cheese in our title. Like alliteration much? (TT.TT.RR). We warn we will waste words with “m”ore. (Flip m upside down and guess what? “Wore.” Sense is questionable but still counts!)

Of course, we understand we never “we never go out of style” (Swift). In other, more, and similar words, the presentation of our ideas might not be for you. Like our style—tone and voice—might be irritating, inappropriate, indulgent (told ya we’d cheeze). And besides a preference for something else, you might be frustrated with how we present rhetorical concepts: like we should make things easier or more difficult or more complicated or less complicated or more sophisticated or less sophisticated: You get the idea.

X

get a coffee, have a soda, spill the tea!🫖

Teasing Styles

Our webtext is not exactly practicing rhetorical equity, where we take into account reader preferences and their own knowledges (i.e., what ya know) in how a text is presented, at least in an ethical way. But that's our choice. That's equity for us author's wanting to challenge audiences.

The text practices equality though: it’s easy to distribute and circulate and we’ve made it accessible for readers with disabilities.

X

diy time!🩷

Realigning Styles

And don’t like our names, our styles, our tone, our voice?

And if rhetorical equity is your thing: Run us through an AI LLM and put it in words you prefer, just watch out for hallucinations (i.e., LIES and new meanings😘)

X

Titular Assumptions😚

X

really hope you are tempted enough to read.🦄

Textual Temptations

Temptation is so textual. Text is so temptational. You might even say people are for the most part temptatextuals😂.

Rhetorc is temptation: it's the temptation to find, lose, make, and destroy texts in all that’s composed: in all that’s mread (heard, tasted, touched, seen, smelled) and written (sounded, cooked, felt, pictured, and fragranced). Ya just got moded.

And it’s tempting to think that customized means rhetorical equity. Without some guardrails “customized” is rhetorical equity taken to some unethical extremes.

Rhetoric isn’t about persuasion or identity or cooperation or any other noun to fill the definitive slot, for us. For us, for us, for us, rhetoric is temptational. Of course, maybe it is procedure + identification. That read kinda smart above. Take it with ya cuz we don't go anywhere with it.

X

you are getting sooooo cloooooose.⌛️

Teasing Technologies

Technologies tease ideas of equity of leveling a field of play. But what’s it really do? Things gotta be leveled as in destroyed, right? Are the techs equitable? Dare they be? Could the be? How should the be?

So we tempt you to our webtext, to consider problems with rhetorical equity, and to try out our technologies that tease rhetorical equity and textual conventions. Our hope is that there is some textual healing.

X

it will be worth it. this is not too much a waste of your time or your life.🍻

Rhetorical Realignments

Putting some ethical affordances and constraints on how rhetorical equity should—not could, would, or dare—mean is important. It’s after all, aligned already and context shift what what equity might be aligned with. It’s a process that should be continuously rhetorically aligning: rhetorically realigning.

X

you accomplished something. you're about to ascend outta popup hell!🫶🏼

Return on Investment

X