 | | Re: Stuff (Was: some other stuff)
|
|
(...) The point is to explain the acronym the first time you use it, then just re-use the acronym where it needs to be repeated. It's actually required by the guidelines for government writing in the UK (or was that an Official Secret? Damn, I can (...) (24 years ago, 21-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Music while building
|
|
(...) Exactly. How can a format be illegal? This kind of half-informed speak gives me hives. I used to watch a lot of CNN, and during the Napster flap they would talk about how users downloaded MP3s from the Napster website. Argh! eric (24 years ago, 21-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Music while building
|
|
(...) I hope this won't be much of a debate: there's nothing illegal or even gray-area about the MP3 format, unless you use an encoder that infringes on the relavent technology patents. Legally, there's no difference between copying your CDs to (...) (24 years ago, 21-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Music while building
|
|
Eric & All, (...) rest (...) Definately, let's see I have aroun 250*60 = 15,000 minutes (250 hours), that would translate into roughly 10 days, if my math is correct (working 8 hours + pushing carts for 5 hours makes for a long day, so my math may (...) (24 years ago, 21-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Who does W. Love? BIG OIL!!!
|
|
(...) He's been pretty much a straight corporate shill. Nor does he care the slightest about California voters, just corporate profit. I'm not surprised at any of this, but I am surprised at the people in denial about it both before the election and (...) (24 years ago, 20-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Who does W. Love? BIG OIL!!!
|
|
(...) That's a very good point. "Proportionately" is a tricky word in this context because ultimately it's the net amount (and severity) of pollution, not the relative amount that's important. (...) 8^) I'm a recent import to Pittsburgh, but I've (...) (24 years ago, 20-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Who does W. Love? BIG OIL!!!
|
|
(...) Dave!: Proportionately, developing nations do indeed put greater amounts of pollutants into the atmosphere than developed nations - chiefly because poorer countries either lack, or have chosen not to install, pollution control devices that (...) (24 years ago, 20-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Who does W. Love? BIG OIL!!!
|
|
(...) Some of them are extremely misguided at best (the nucleardann guy in particular), but a few of them underscore the "mechanics" point I was making earlier--for example, the Stanford data on solar output. I think I've been lumped by using the (...) (24 years ago, 20-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Who does W. Love? BIG OIL!!!
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Lindsay Frederick Braun writes: !!!KA-SNIP!!! (...) I finally had a chance to look some things up. Here's what I found in 30 minutes time: (URL) haven't read each and every one of these, so I'm not vouching for them - you (...) (24 years ago, 20-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: updated pellet gun site, new site design
|
|
Geordan, The disclaimer is a legal thing. Simply state on your page that you are in no way connected to the lego company. If you do a page on bascially any hobby (movies, music,roleplaying games) you need a disclaimer to keep the lawyers away. (...) (24 years ago, 20-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Todd and Eric's attitude (was Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings)
|
|
(...) Guys, take it off-line, please. James (24 years ago, 19-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Todd and Eric's attitude (was Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings)
|
|
(...) You are obviously correct, of course; I didn't remember that incident. (...) Again, I never said I thought you were 13. Please stop indicating that I did. (...) Well, it wasn't meant as one. There is nothing wrong with being young and not (...) (24 years ago, 19-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Todd and Eric's attitude (was Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings)
|
|
(...) Ah, that is where you are mistaken. Here, (URL) that may jog your memory. If I am a 13-year-old, then I was 7 hen i had a son - now that would have been something. You can not judge somebody by words they use, I think Scott Chambers put it (...) (24 years ago, 19-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Who does W. Love? BIG OIL!!!
|
|
Hi, I'll go to Tom first and Bill second. (...) Not in terms of breathing, but in terms of heat dissipation, it's better an issue now when something can theoretically be done about it. If cleaner plants mean higher energy costs, IMHO the best (...) (24 years ago, 19-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Todd and Eric's attitude (was Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings)
|
|
(...) The tone and vocabulary of every post you make. As you said elsewhere, that's the only evidence I have of anything about you, and it strongly indicated to me that you were not an adult. Which, BTW, is not an insult. Beleive it or not, there (...) (24 years ago, 19-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Todd and Eric's attitude (was Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings)
|
|
(...) What evidence? I would LOVE to see what evidence you have or had. And FYI, words are not prrof -we come from different places - so we use different words. Plese visit this post, it was for you: (URL)eric (...) (24 years ago, 19-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Todd and Eric's attitude (was Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings)
|
|
(...) I haven't made any personal attacks. Sorry. I made an observation based on the evidence at hand, one which I beleived- and still beleive- was true. In retrospect, there was no reason to post it, I simply should have stopped engaging in a (...) (24 years ago, 19-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Who does W. Love? BIG OIL!!!
|
|
I personally don't think global warming from our CO2 output is an issue AT THIS time. However, if we continue to level all the greenery near the equator that converts the CO2 to O2 that is useful to us, it might actually become an issue in the (...) (24 years ago, 18-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Who does W. Love? BIG OIL!!!
|
|
(...) He's demonstrated in two big ways so far that he's not the President he was campaigning to be. The "Uniter-not-a-divider" has rammed far-Right policy and cabinet appointments down the throat of bipartisanship, and now he's backed off a (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Who does W. Love? BIG OIL!!!
|
|
(...) I think he deserves the benefit of the doubt. He hasn't demonstrated, here or in Texas, that he's one of those kinds of politicians yet. (...) That would be better than selling "nucular" technology to foreign enemies for campaign (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Who does W. Love? BIG OIL!!!
|
|
(...) You're aware, I trust, that the President can pardon whomever he (or, when the time comes, she) chooses, right? Perhaps we might ask why Bush pardoned Weinberger or why Ford pardoned Nixon. Obviously the Rich pardon was performed in a (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Who does W. Love? BIG OIL!!!
|
|
(...) Perhaps he's referring to this: (URL) wait, my mistake--that article identifies the greenhouse effect as real. And before anyone gripes about the Clinton News Network pushing a pointy-headed liberal agenda, the study appears in the scientific (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Who does W. Love? BIG OIL!!!
|
|
I forgot a couple things, sorry. :^P (...) Many of the old power generators are driven by diesel engines. Coal engines, too. (...) Found this a few minutes ago. (URL) Admiral Muffin Head (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Who does W. Love? BIG OIL!!!
|
|
(...) I can't believe you think his concerns are noble. His concern is for all those big factories that are going to line his pockets (or donate to his next campaign, or whatever) when he allows them to spew carbon dioxide in copious amounts. (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Who does W. Love? BIG OIL!!!
|
|
(...) Betch ol' "W" will be helpin' promote his homeland's other interest, should Mad Cow threaten his other buddies. Here's a new slogan for "W": "Beef and Oil, goes together like Dorothy and the Wicked Witch. Home cooking, like mama used to make." (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Who does W. Love? BIG OIL!!!
|
|
(...) Hail, Grand Admiral, Sir! Sgt. Farkas requests permission to speak freely, Sir. I read the story and didn't see anything about oil. Also, you can't discount his (W's) stated concern about energy prices, especially living on the west coast. And (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An Apology
|
|
(...) This whole incident reminds me that we should all be understanding that the written word is sometimes hard to interpret correctly. One thing I was immediately curious, noticing that Mladen is posting from a Canadian e-mail address is if he is (...) (24 years ago, 15-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An Apology
|
|
Rec'vd and duely noted, I must say for All to know, Mladen sent me a private e-mail apologizing for misdeeds done, I encouraged him not to fret and that I too was a little at fault, However, and more importantly, I would ask all the fellow LUGNETers (...) (24 years ago, 15-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: WOW ~ #1593 Classic Space ~ WOW!!!...!!!
|
|
Hey, I was just a little disturbed because I posted first about a good sale, but my thread was so small compared with the second person who posted the same sale. Kind of stupid but what the heck. When I read this new thread that was basically (...) (24 years ago, 15-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | An Apology
|
|
As lame as it sounds giving an apology after several people have already told me that I am rude, mean, and possibly evil person, I am still going to try to repent my evil deeds. To whom it may concern, I, Mladen Pejic, apologize to Eric Sophie and (...) (24 years ago, 14-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.build.mecha)
|
| |
| | Re: Kunimasa Fujisawa's AMAZING mecha!
|
|
(...) It does. Thanks! ++Lar (24 years ago, 14-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Kunimasa Fujisawa's AMAZING mecha!
|
|
Excellent, I'll take that as a compliment! (...) (24 years ago, 14-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Kunimasa Fujisawa's AMAZING mecha!
|
|
True, True, throwing in a half described compliment, dosen't always come off as intended. I did send a reply stating that a separete posting singing praises was in order. Thanks for being impartial. I'll be more specific in future postings! (...) (24 years ago, 14-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: kudos to eric
|
|
Hey thanks, gotta try to maintain what we got right?, so if we ask, mayby we will forgive, I was a little shocked by the reply, I just can't see a good builder on the outs, but, we share a passion, I guess we are not all built the same - ha! pun (...) (24 years ago, 14-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Kunimasa Fujisawa's AMAZING mecha!
|
|
(...) I read it "In My Experience" HTH. eric (24 years ago, 14-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | kudos to eric
|
|
cool kudos to eric for being such a good guy about all this, this is the kind of post that certainly catches my eye. howD eric thx for coming -paul (...) (24 years ago, 14-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Kunimasa Fujisawa's AMAZING mecha!
|
|
Thank you , that's exacly what I Intended!! (...) (24 years ago, 14-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Kunimasa Fujisawa's AMAZING mecha!
|
|
Whoa, take it easy, I only wanted to add a bit of respect thru a small comment. The Words "big mech-y creations" was ill chosen, he does have a few that are about two feet tall or so, so "medium" mayby a more apt description. -nano fig or not. (...) (24 years ago, 14-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Kunimasa Fujisawa's AMAZING mecha!
|
|
(...) Your point is well taken. (although it was Eric's comment that Mladen responded to) However even a braggart has to learn to let perceived slights to his or her skill just pass on by without a response. In fact if you really WANT to be a good (...) (24 years ago, 14-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Kunimasa Fujisawa's AMAZING mecha!
|
|
(...) No, just tip the bottle (back) and enjoy. But don't tip it over, we don't need any whine spillage. FUT .pun ++Lar (24 years ago, 14-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.pun)
|
| |
| | Re: Kunimasa Fujisawa's AMAZING mecha!
|
|
Whoa! hold on there, Tex! "I'd rather be understanding than right" -me fact: everybody in here is just trying to communicate there thoughts and feelings and to get feedback on others thoughts and feelings fact: ascii is easily misinterpreted fact: (...) (24 years ago, 14-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Kunimasa Fujisawa's AMAZING mecha!
|
|
(...) Mark is far from the only person who thinks your response was both arrogant and rude. eric (24 years ago, 14-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Kunimasa Fujisawa's AMAZING mecha!
|
|
(...) I don't know why you wouldn't be flattered. Eric said "your work is pretty good TOO" (emphasis mine), which is putting your stuff on the same level as the models you were raving about. I would certainly take this as a compliment. Please either (...) (24 years ago, 14-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Kunimasa Fujisawa's AMAZING mecha!
|
|
(...) No doubt. Mladen has turned out some great models. It's his sheer arrogance that bugs the crap out of me. If I could just killfile his posts and instead check his website periodically, that would be best. I'm sure others say the same of me (...) (24 years ago, 14-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Kunimasa Fujisawa's AMAZING mecha!
|
|
(...) When was I being rude? I even typed "sarcasm ON/OFF" when I posted my reply to indicate that I was making a point! I never stomped Eric. If you want my opinion, I think his models are excellent, and some of the most awe-inspiring I have ever (...) (24 years ago, 14-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Kunimasa Fujisawa's AMAZING mecha!
|
|
(...) I understand that Mladen may not have felt totally flattered by Eric's comment, but I sincerely believe that Eric _intended_ it as a compliment. I was just calling Mladen on his rudeness, because I don't think Eric deserved to be stomped on. I (...) (24 years ago, 14-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Kunimasa Fujisawa's AMAZING mecha!
|
|
(...) I have to agree with Sproat here...I've lost respect. Mladen - your attitude came off sounding like you felt you deserved more praise, and his compliment wasn't enough for your models. It appears to me, at least, that you have an over-inflated (...) (24 years ago, 14-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Kunimasa Fujisawa's AMAZING mecha!
|
|
(...) Hey, I respect Mladen! His stuff IS great, as is Eric Sophie's work. I'm wondering though if you pull up to a full service attitude pump and pump your own attitude, effectively making it self-service, do you have to pay the full service price? (...) (24 years ago, 14-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Kunimasa Fujisawa's AMAZING mecha!
|
|
(...) gut-level reaction. When I read your comment yesterday, it sounded to me like a "looking down on someone" kind of comment. I figured I musta been mistaking your meaning, but it seemed to stand out. I'd seen similar sorts of confusions in the (...) (24 years ago, 14-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Who does W. Love? BIG OIL!!!
|
|
(...) Wait. The former governor of Texas loves oil companies? Well, that's a huge shock. eric (24 years ago, 14-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Kunimasa Fujisawa's AMAZING mecha!
|
|
(...) Mladen, you are a braggart and a serious jerk. I think I speak for most everyone here when I tell you that you have just lost the valuable respect of many. It would be best if you left your whiny, self-serving attitude at home. Cheers, - (...) (24 years ago, 14-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.build.mecha)
|
| |
| | Re: WOW ~ #1593 Classic Space ~ WOW!!!...!!!
|
|
(...) Ok - your point? I did that. And yes, I saw the other thread - so what? Can I not start a new thread? Did I offend you, or anybody by starting a new thread? I really doubt it - so does it matter? Why did you feel you had to post this? Like I (...) (24 years ago, 14-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.market.auction)
|
| |
| | Re: Kunimasa Fujisawa's AMAZING mecha!
|
|
(...) around and insult the person trying to pay you a compliment. Like the time someone told you you'd improved and you went off on them. (I just don't even feel like looking it up) Just exactly where do you get off anyway? ~Grand Admiral Muffin (...) (24 years ago, 14-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Who does W. Love? BIG OIL!!!
|
|
It Begins. (URL) a guy. ~Grand Admiral Muffin Head (24 years ago, 14-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: NOT the Queen's English ('Muricans)
|
|
(...) Oh quit cracking jokes. ~Grand Admiral Muffin Head (24 years ago, 13-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.pun)
|
| |
| | Re: NOT the Queen's English ('Muricans)
|
|
(...) Okay, there. Pared down. Happy? :-) (...) That depends: engineers can't spell, scientists are better about it. (...) You can call me Al, but you don't need to call me Aluminium? (...) Nothing to make it a long U. The root word is Al-um, not (...) (24 years ago, 13-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: NOT the Queen's English (was re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
|
|
My God, header frenzy!: (...) Sure, those Cal Tech boys can rig up an RF unit to screw with the Rose Bowl scoreboard, but can they really spell...? It's like asking someone with a doctorate in pediatrics (paediatrics for the ANZAC/UK crowd) to take (...) (24 years ago, 13-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Grammar vs Logic (was: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenienttoday)
|
|
(...) "Write" like a lot of other words has several meanings. I've always understood those shorthandings (of which there are soooo many in Dutch that I can't possibly follow any but the most rudimentary conversations even after eight months) have (...) (24 years ago, 13-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Acronyms (Was Re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
|
|
(...) Oops, I should clarify that Rolls Royce is both the singular and the plural form. Maggie C. (who has once again sacrificed clarity for the sake of brevity) Oh yes, and I shall henceforth use AFOL as the plural of AFOL since your argument that (...) (24 years ago, 12-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Acronyms (Was Re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
|
|
(...) Not a "real" word, but a word nonetheless, as opposed to a string of distinct letters. AFOL, if pronounced as a word ("I'm an AFOL") rather than spelled out ("I'm an A-F-O-L"), is an acronym by that definition. The convention was to say "WAC" (...) (24 years ago, 12-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Acronyms (Was Re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
|
|
(...) "radar" wasn't a word until the technology was invented. So does that mean it isn't an acronym? This is what Dictionary.com has to say about it: ----- ac·ro·nym (kr-nm) n. A word formed from the initial letters of a name, such as WAC for (...) (24 years ago, 12-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Acronyms (Was Re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
|
|
(...) Hmm.. I've heard the phrase "so-and-so drives a Rolls," which is like saying "so-and-so drives a cars." Strange. I would argue that the plural of AFOL is AFOL, since "F" can stand for "Fans" as easily as it can for "Fan." I've often heard the (...) (24 years ago, 12-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Acronyms (Was Re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
|
|
(...) Okay, if attorneys general, courts martial and Rolls Royce are plural forms, shouldn't the plural of AFOL be AF'sOL? Or are the rules different for acronyms? And speaking of acronyms, hasn't it already been argued that technically in order to (...) (24 years ago, 12-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Grammar vs Logic (was: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenienttoday)
|
|
(...) Well that certainly makes more sense. I still think it sounds odd though - "write me", as if telling me to grab a sheet of paper upon which I must inscribe the word "me". Maybe's it's just me :-) Jennifer Clark (24 years ago, 12-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Grammar vs Logic (was: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
|
|
(...) I always assumed it was a shortened sentence for "Write me a letter." ~Grand Admiral Muffin Head (24 years ago, 12-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Grammar vs Logic (was: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
|
|
(...) Another one: people in the US often seem to use to the phrase "write me" which I assume means "write to me". Any idea where this comes from? I always found it a bit on the odd side, especially if taken literally. Saying that, some USisms are (...) (24 years ago, 12-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is Bionicle violence?
|
|
(...) Marvin Harris has an interesting theory for why human culture has cultured men to be warriors and women to stay home and watch the kids. His theory is that it's ultimately a population control measure, not because wars kill people off (they (...) (24 years ago, 11-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is Bionicle violence?
|
|
I don't think boys are wired for violence. It's just that boys are bigger, so they're better at it (those teenage years, maybe, are a bit chaotic, though). These days, though, women have access to guns, military, etc., and often can be quite bigger (...) (24 years ago, 10-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: NOT the Queen's English (was re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
|
|
It's very useful - more useful than al-u-MIN-ium, which doesn't exist ;-) (...) -- | Tom Stangl, iPlanet Web Server Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp | iPlanet Support - (URL) A division of AOL Time Warner | Please do not associate my (...) (24 years ago, 9-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Copyright vs Public Domain?
|
|
(...) which concerns how existing public-domain stories are being exploited for commercial purposes by Walt Disney Co. (In fact, I found the article to be somewhat boring up until this point, around paragraph 28 ;-) Also, after this point, the (...) (24 years ago, 9-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Copyright vs Public Domain?
|
|
An interesting issue - I don't think I'm going to dive in on this but I thought I would post it for others to give opinions on. I'm interested in hearing what you have to say: (URL) (24 years ago, 9-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: NOT the Queen's English (was re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
|
|
(...) No use crying over spelt milk... ;) Jeff (follow-ups to o-t.pun) (24 years ago, 9-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: NOT the Queen's English (was re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
|
|
(...) And just to add more useless information to this discussion, I threw both spellings at Google to see which spelling was more often used online: Aluminum: 1,560,000 Aluminium: 749,000 Both: 56,800 -JDF (24 years ago, 9-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: NOT the Queen's English
|
|
(...) Add to that "let me aks you a question" and "I took a pitcher with my camera." Both usages are popular here in "Picksburg." Dave! (24 years ago, 9-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: NOT the Queen's English (was re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
|
|
(...) Here's one that drives me BONKERS! *"All of a sudden."* What is a "sudden". And how does "all" of one cause something to occur quickly. What does "part of a sudden" do? (I looked it up - it is also a noun, but it still drives me crazy). Here's (...) (24 years ago, 9-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Phrenetic Phonetics
|
|
(...) That's tres chic of you. 8^) Dave! FUT OT.Fun (24 years ago, 9-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today
|
|
(...) Bad Spellers of the world UNTIE! Santosh ;-) (24 years ago, 9-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Grammar vs Logic (was: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
|
|
(...) Apology accepted! It's just that Ive heard the phrase used hundreds (maybe thousands) of times, mostly on the 'net, always by Americans... (...) The phrase is actually gramatically correct - it's the logic that's incorrect! (...) Doesn't (...) (24 years ago, 9-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today
|
|
Hey, Don't blame my country! I'll accept full blame for my gramatical mistake! :) The funny thing is that I'm usually the one correcting other people's grammar at work! Hmm - I guess I must have started using that phrase a long time ago and nobody (...) (24 years ago, 9-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: NOT the Queen's English (was re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
|
|
(...) Wow, "More Vegemite, less Marmite"!!! You must be one of the militant ones.... Maggie (24 years ago, 9-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: NOT the Queen's English (was re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
|
|
(...) *sigh* Yeah, that's the thing about the English language, it is constantly evolving (some might say devolving!)-- otherwise I suppose we'd all go around talking like Chaucer's characters. The rate at which one accepts these changes is one of (...) (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: NOT the Queen's English (was re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
|
|
(...) Hmmmm, well, my father-in-law - who has has multiple degrees in chemistry from Cal Tech and teaches chemistry - spells it aluminum. Nyahh, nyahh, nyahh! :-P And since you note both are listed, it kinda reduces you first comment's (...) (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today
|
|
(...) Ooops missed the footnote. [1] Strine: Strine for Australian (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: NOT the Queen's English (was re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
|
|
(...) I've been told by those not brought up on Vegemite that it's basically inedible. Pity, I've been eating it since before I could walk! You'll see my favourite concentrated yeast extract even gets a mention on my profile page (URL) to the (...) (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today
|
|
(...) Never let it be said that a Strine[1] was adverse to a little "linguistic laziness", but in this case, it actually changes the entire meaning of the sentence. Most people know what is actually meant, but it just doesn't make sense to me, when (...) (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: NOT the Queen's English (was re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
|
|
(...) Don't you mean "spelled" ? ;^) ~Grand Admiral Muffin Head (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Phrenetic Phonetics
|
|
(...) Wow, another person who pronounces it wrong. :^P I can't find anything in the dictionary that's spelled "Technic" and pronounced (tek-neek) ~Grand Admiral Muffin Head (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: NOT the Queen's English (was re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
|
|
(...) Except on most periodic tables, you'll see it spelt "Aluminium". Most dictionaries list one as a variant of the other. ROSCO (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: NOT the Queen's English (was re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
|
|
(...) How else would you pronounce aluminum? Can't be five syllables with only four vowels. ;-) Bruce (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today
|
|
(...) I tend to think here in the "colonies" we have naturally evolved the language, and thankfully so. I cannot imagine eating "Bangers and Mash" or "Spotted Dick", or even worse smoking a "fag". I will take a little linguistic laziness anyday. (...) (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: NOT the Queen's English (was re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
|
|
Is that metal Aloomenum (which I'm sure Americans are keeping secret from the rest of the world) actually useful for anything? Santosh (...) (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today
|
|
(...) How do you mispronounce Futuron? I assume it is to be correctly pronounced as future-on, but am I wrong in this? And while I've never heard it pronounced Duh-plo I always liked the correct pronounciation of Lego since then those old (...) (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Phrenetic Phonetics
|
|
(...) 8^) Not me. My first exposure to "Technic" was in the form of "Technics," pronounced "teck-neeks" by a salesperson at a stereo store. Dave! (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today
|
|
(...) For that matter, has there ever been an official pronunciation proclamation by LEGO to prove that their product is pronounced (leh-goh) as opposed to (lee-goh) or even (lay-goh) ? I follow the course of logic that: Technical = (tek-nik-al) and (...) (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today
|
|
(...) I'm not so sure about this. In an episode of the George Reeves Superman series, the mad doctor of the week had developed a cold ray that projected a beam of cold 2000 degrees below zero. If this is true, then obviously "absolute zero" is no (...) (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today
|
|
(...) No one else does, right? :-) Anyway I do agree with you. "could care less" is wrong. When I slip, I explain away by agreeing that I indeed could care less... just not very MUCH less. (no real system can reach an absolute zero temperature... is (...) (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today
|
|
(...) Just for my own edification, has there ever been an official pronunciation proclamation by LEGO (which, if not for the pronuciation they use, could arguably rhyme with "ego" despite its etymology) as to which is the correct way to say Technic (...) (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today
|
|
(...) Word. And don't get me started on people who mispronounce "Futuron." Pedants of the world, unite and take over! Coby (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: NOT the Queen's English (was re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
|
|
(...) Billy Squier. Dave! (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today
|
|
(...) It's kind of like "everyone does things their own way," which is clear noun/pronoun disagreement. These colloquialisms have been around for at least decades and will no doubt ultimately be absorbed into "correct" American English. Still, for (...) (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
