Subject:
|
Re: Pants (was Re: Recreational vehicles and more questions about the US
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.geek
|
Date:
|
Thu, 20 Apr 2000 19:07:24 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
248 times
|
| |
|
|
Could the usage on this possibly "pantsed", Lar? As in; "Some luser ha><or
pantsed the system by routing his IP through the net-aware toaster.", perhaps?
This is an Americanism for the (theoretically endearing) trick of forcibly de-
trousering someone, leaving them with their jeans around their ankles.
-Cheese, the amateur linguistic ethnologist.
In lugnet.off-topic.geek, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.geek, Richard Franks writes:
> > Erm, well.. pants is the easiest one.. it means "trousers" in North America,
> > but "underwear, y-fronts" in the UK.
>
> And also, apparently, "bad, or something similar", which has puzzled me no
> end. as in:
>
> Q:"Is the server OK or crashed?"
> A:"It is pants at the moment, some luser wrote a noddy prog that went pants".
>
> or something like that. Why is that? underwear is good. (try not wearing
> any... that will convert you.)
>
> ++Lar
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
27 Messages in This Thread:
   
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
