 | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.lego, Tommy Armstrong wrote:
> I have probably said this before but here goes again. I can think of few other
> sub-cultures that are as educated, creative (in an engineering way), and
> passionate as the LEGO sub-culture. I have constantly been amazed at the
> incredibly creative solutions that y'all come up with to solve almost any
> problem with bricks and programming. I mean, heck, when there was not a 3d
> graphical design solution--y'all simply wrote one. Well, I do not mean it was
> simple, just that is was just done. There was not a sculpture program, so
> someone wrote one. There was not a mosaic program, so someone wrote one. Y'all
> write OPERATING SYSTEMS, for heavens sake. How much trouble can it be to come up
> with an alternative track and alternative motor? Many of you are incredible
> mechanical engineers--electrical engineers--software engineers-some are even
> probably civil engineers.
>
> My background is in product design and I know there are always plenty of viable
> solutions out there if someone or group will just do it.
>
> I mean--y'all are really smarter and more creative in many ways than TLG--
>
> I just seem to find it funny that y'all cannot come up with a "standard"
> alternative to the problem. You already have the specification list and that is
> 30% of the solution.
>
> Am I missing something? I might be. Now I do not want to criticize anyone--and
> this is not meant to be critical--but how difficult would it be to get a group
> to come together, create a specification, and then get it manufactured? If y'all
> really have the numbers that you think you have, it has to be worth the effort
> for some small nimble company to fill the niche.
>
>
> Tommy Armstrong
I have to throw something in here...
Tommy probably doesn't realize this (and I'm probably breaking some rule by
telling him), but those of us up heah yonder Nawth sometimes use words like
"y'all" in a condescending, rednecky way. But for those of you reading this, I
want you to know that Tommy really does sound like he types. He actually talks
like that. It's not a redneck kinda sound, though, it's the Southern Gentleman
sound. More Andy Griffith or Jed Clampett, not so much Jeff Foxworthy or Boss
Hog.
He ain't all that bad.... for a Rebel.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> > I mean--y'all are really smarter and more creative in many ways than
> > TLG--
> >
> > Tommy Armstrong
>
> I have to throw something in here...
>
> Tommy probably doesn't realize this (and I'm probably breaking some rule
> by
> telling him), but those of us up heah yonder Nawth sometimes use words
> like
> "y'all" in a condescending, rednecky way. But for those of you reading
> this, I
> want you to know that Tommy really does sound like he types. He actually
> talks
> like that. It's not a redneck kinda sound, though, it's the Southern
> Gentleman
> sound. More Andy Griffith or Jed Clampett, not so much Jeff Foxworthy or
> Boss
> Hog.
>
> He ain't all that bad.... for a Rebel.
Are ya'll makin fun of us purebread (not imbred as you may suspect) good
ole' country boys? Don't make me call up Roy D. Murcer to come whoop your
...
:P
-Rob
FUT - o-t.fun
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
>
> I have to throw something in here...
>
> Tommy probably doesn't realize this (and I'm probably breaking some rule by
> telling him), but those of us up heah yonder Nawth sometimes use words like
> "y'all" in a condescending, rednecky way. But for those of you reading this, I
> want you to know that Tommy really does sound like he types. He actually talks
> like that. It's not a redneck kinda sound, though, it's the Southern Gentleman
> sound. More Andy Griffith or Jed Clampett, not so much Jeff Foxworthy or Boss
> Hog.
>
> He ain't all that bad.... for a Rebel.
Yes, I am aware that "y'all" does have some connotations--but have decided that
it is really the only politically correct, all encompassing, non-gender,
non-racial, non-religious specfic pronoun that is available in the English
language-at least American English. "You guys" is unacceptable as gender
specific, simply using "you" does not work because it takes context to determine
whether singlular or plural, "you people" sounds like preaching and I really do
not like to be preached to unless I request a sermon. "Y'all" works for
everything--but you do have to be careful how you use it since it is a "global
variable" and refers to anyone (or thing-it can include animals also--at least
dogs--not sure about cats). It is all inclusive and therefore is a "communal"
pro-noun in the the best sense of the word. So be careful how you use it as it
excludes no one--and sometimes that might not be your intention.
The abandonment of the the word "thou" as a second person singular pronoun
necessitated the use of y'all to a certain extent to make certain you were
referring to second person plural and not singular. Many languages do not have
that problem as they have separate words for second person singular and second
person plural. We actually have one "ye" but that has gone the way of thee and
thou also. "Ye of little faith--there is always a technological solution for a
technological problem." And "ye" has a preachy connotation which is to be
avoided at all costs.
So y'all get on the bandwagon and start using more politcally correct language.
This is the era of diversity, afterall.
Tommy Armstrong
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.lego, Tommy Armstrong wrote:
> "You guys" is unacceptable as gender specific
If you go far enough north it isn't!
They also use the other variant, youse guyses, as in, "You got da deep snow over
to youse guyses place, eh?" to which the response would be, "Ya, sure, but we
cleared da path to da sauna!"
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.lego, Duane Collicott wrote:
> In lugnet.lego, Tommy Armstrong wrote:
> > "You guys" is unacceptable as gender specific
>
> If you go far enough north it isn't!
>
> They also use the other variant, youse guyses, as in, "You got da deep snow over
> to youse guyses place, eh?" to which the response would be, "Ya, sure, but we
> cleared da path to da sauna!"
:)
And don't forget, 'sauna' is a three-syllable word. The 'u' is not silent!
Steve
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.lego, Tommy Armstrong wrote:
> "You guys" is unacceptable as gender specific,
Actually "guys" is a gender neutral term:
http://m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary/guy definition 3 entry 3b
-Orion
| | | | | | |
