You’re back to nutspeak words; nowhere else is this sort of construction generalized.
Look, we started out here with a simple plea disguised as a rant just to make the point that too many posters have gotten sloppy in their editing and now we have people coming in trying to hi-jack the thread and turn it into an exercise in neologistic gymnastics.
Let’s just concentrate on taking one last glance before its two layt!!!
It's in general enough usage to appear in my computer's dictionary, which is hardly the OED. Affect is a noun describing people's apparent emotional reaction. As such, it is most often used by people who discuss people's apparent emotional reactions.
The bottom line is that someone mentioned a usage you did not know. You could have said, "Hm. I didn't know that. You learn something new every day." But instead you decided to dismiss the usage as part of the "nutcase lexicon," insulting others for the simple act of knowing something you did not.
and now we have people coming in trying to hi-jack the thread and turn it into an exercise in neologistic gymnastics.
After refusing to let go of your bizarre hobby horse, you're now accusing others of hijacking the thread -- as if thread drift weren't a normal part of any online discussion, especially one whose chief appeal is wiseassery.
Affect as a noun referring to emotional state is hardly a neologism; the Latin affectusrefers to emotional state, and the word was in use in Middle English by 1400.
Let’s just concentrate on taking one last glance before its two layt!!!
Yes, by all means, those of us who love language should discuss it and have fun with it, but always remember to stop short of introducing any information Old Professer didn't already know.