0

I got a message from a rando ...

Some rando walked up to me and said ...

It seems clear to me that the speaker here didn't know who this person was at the beginning of the interaction, when the conversation started.

My question is whether this phrasing is still typical if the speaker discovered who the person was and that they were not a stranger by the end of the conversation.

e.g. "I got a message from a rando about my bike for sale. It turns out they are my long lost brother."

My purpose in asking this question is to better inform a discussion about reasonable interpretations of the use of "rando" and what it implies about if and when new information may have or did not become available.

12
  • 7
    Rando is the random stranger, often on the internet. What happens later and how soon you marry is another matter. Feb 16 at 14:11
  • 2
    Have you looked it up in a dictionary? It's not a precise term, it typically relates to a combination of the person's appearance, behaviour and social status. What does "the speaker discovered who the person was" actually mean - you find they're your long lost brother, or that their name is John and they believe aliens are controlling their thoughts? "Stranger" isn't a precise term either: would you consider someone you've only just met to be a stranger? It would depend.
    – Stuart F
    Feb 16 at 14:52
  • 1
    With the word 'stranger', the [for-the-foreseeable-future-]permanence/impermanence of that status is obviously determined by context: [a] 'A complete stranger handed me £20 when I was waiting for the train to Timbuktu. I often wonder who she was.' [b] 'This stranger walked into the meeting, and I disliked him at once. Did my attytude change over the coming months as I got to know him? Reader, I married him.' // Note that 'rando' is slang and often seen as disparaging. Feb 16 at 15:34
  • 1
    He was a "random stranger" when he walked up to you. It's irrelevant to that initial statement whether you got to know more about him later. Feb 16 at 20:01
  • 1
    Rando is fundamentally a dismissive term. So it's someone that you think would have zero impact on your future.
    – Phil Sweet
    Feb 16 at 21:30

1 Answer 1

1

It means who they are is of no importance - they are fungible and nondescript as far as the speaker is concerned. None of their attributes mattered to you, whether you knew them or not.

My question is whether this phrasing is still typical if the speaker discovered who the person was and that they were not a stranger by the end of the conversation.

As a matter of ordinary social conduct, you wouldn't normally be so dismissive towards friends and family as to call them randos. Randos are John Q. Public who briefly inserted themselves into your awareness uninvited; and who you expended no energy on and cared nothing about.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.