metadigital Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 So did I, then I grew out of them. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> [i suspect that ] You[']r[e] older th[a]n me [, then]. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That explains your grasp of grammar, then. ...I still blame the PC for ruining computer gaming and killing the Commodore Amiga market, mass producing simple, braindead, dumbed down games compared to the Amiga, not to mention the awful controls and hardware limitations... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> "PC" stands for Personal Computer, which does not exclude any computer format, despite the current ubiquity of the IBM PC (which were originally "MS DOS compatible"), so you can have your cake and eat it too. "PC" is just as much about Amigas as it is the Apple //e and the Commodore 64 (). OBSCVRVM PER OBSCVRIVS ET IGNOTVM PER IGNOTIVS OPVS ARTIFICEM PROBAT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Surreptishus Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 Acorn Electron for ever!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reveilled Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 (edited) So did I, then I grew out of them. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> [i suspect that ] You[']r[e] older th[a]n me [, then]. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That explains your grasp of grammar, then. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Actually, wouldn't his post indicate a poor grasp of spelling? In fact, your version of the sentence changed kyle's post from a statement of fact to a suspicion by adding in an extra clause, namely, "I suspect that". Indeed, by editing the grammar of the sentence and apparently seeming to correct it while instead changing the meaning of the sentence, would that not suggest a poor grasp of grammar on your own part? " In proper English, kotorkyle's statement would simply be "You are older than me", not "I suspect that you're older than me, then." EDIT: Oh, and you kept "you're" capitalised, puting a capital letter in the middle of a sentence for something other than a proper noun. Tut tut. Edited October 28, 2005 by Reveilled Hawk! Eggplant! AWAKEN! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calax Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 Suspicion doubt guilt.... all shall be as we want it to... I <3 my PC Victor of the 5 year fan fic competition! Kevin Butler will awesome your face off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Surreptishus Posted October 29, 2005 Share Posted October 29, 2005 <3 is a heart?? i always thought it was a nutsack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calax Posted October 29, 2005 Share Posted October 29, 2005 nope <3 is Victor of the 5 year fan fic competition! Kevin Butler will awesome your face off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabrielle Posted October 29, 2005 Share Posted October 29, 2005 Infidels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metadigital Posted October 29, 2005 Share Posted October 29, 2005 So did I, then I grew out of them. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> [i suspect that ] You[']r[e] older th[a]n me [, then]. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That explains your grasp of grammar, then. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Actually, wouldn't his post indicate a poor grasp of spelling? In fact, your version of the sentence changed kyle's post from a statement of fact to a suspicion by adding in an extra clause, namely, "I suspect that". Indeed, by editing the grammar of the sentence and apparently seeming to correct it while instead changing the meaning of the sentence, would that not suggest a poor grasp of grammar on your own part? " In proper English, kotorkyle's statement would simply be "You are older than me", not "I suspect that you're older than me, then." EDIT: Oh, and you kept "you're" capitalised, puting a capital letter in the middle of a sentence for something other than a proper noun. Tut tut. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> grammar is [t]he study of how words and their component parts combine to form sentences ... (etcetra), so No; kotorkyle implicitly posits the hypothesis that Gabrielle is more senior, but does not directly affirm this to be a fact, either known to, or confirmed by, him (her);my exterpolation of the original statement may be regarded as editing (for sure), but it was done within the spirit of clarification and not for any malevolent purposes, so it is at worst artistic licence and in no way poor grammar; I admit that leaving the capitalised Y was a more idiosyncratic grammatical interpretation; however I would justify my indulgence by citing the obvious benefit of presenting the original phrase in its entirety, as well as my additional predicate (quoth you, above) to indicate:my interpretation the fact that it was my interpretation the range and limits of my editing Of course replacing the Y with [y] would have been technically more in keeping with accepted grammatical idiom, it would have lost the above nuances. OBSCVRVM PER OBSCVRIVS ET IGNOTVM PER IGNOTIVS OPVS ARTIFICEM PROBAT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabrielle Posted October 29, 2005 Share Posted October 29, 2005 Age has nothing to do with the ability to speak/write correctly. You could be forty and write and spell like a child. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reveilled Posted October 29, 2005 Share Posted October 29, 2005 So did I, then I grew out of them. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> [i suspect that ] You[']r[e] older th[a]n me [, then]. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That explains your grasp of grammar, then. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Actually, wouldn't his post indicate a poor grasp of spelling? In fact, your version of the sentence changed kyle's post from a statement of fact to a suspicion by adding in an extra clause, namely, "I suspect that". Indeed, by editing the grammar of the sentence and apparently seeming to correct it while instead changing the meaning of the sentence, would that not suggest a poor grasp of grammar on your own part? " In proper English, kotorkyle's statement would simply be "You are older than me", not "I suspect that you're older than me, then." EDIT: Oh, and you kept "you're" capitalised, puting a capital letter in the middle of a sentence for something other than a proper noun. Tut tut. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> [*]grammar is [t]he study of how words and their component parts combine to form sentences ... (etcetra), so No; Alright, I suppose you get this one. [*]kotorkyle implicitly posits the hypothesis that Gabrielle is more senior, but does not directly affirm this to be a fact, either known to, or confirmed by, him (her);my exterpolation of the original statement may be regarded as editing (for sure), but it was done within the spirit of clarification and not for any malevolent purposes, so it is at worst artistic licence and in no way poor grammar; No, it's still poor grammar. You changed the sentence from an assertion about the relative ages of kotorkyle and gabrielle to an assertion about the presence of a suspicion about the relative ages of the two. The first makes an assertion about the ages, the second raises a possibility. Even if it's artistic liscence, and even if it was not done for any malevolant purposes, the meaning of the sentence has still been changed, thus there has been a change, rather than a correction, in the grammar. Hawk! Eggplant! AWAKEN! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Surreptishus Posted October 29, 2005 Share Posted October 29, 2005 Oh no its the light/colour thread all over again!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabrielle Posted October 29, 2005 Share Posted October 29, 2005 I see things in black and white. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laozi Posted October 29, 2005 Share Posted October 29, 2005 Being colorblind can be tough, People laugh when I say that I think a jellyfish is one of the most beautiful things in the world. What they don't understand is, I mean a jellyfish with long, blond hair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nartwak Posted October 29, 2005 Share Posted October 29, 2005 I high excruciatingly high standards for myslef...:D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaguars4ever Posted October 29, 2005 Share Posted October 29, 2005 I high excruciatingly high standards for myslef...:D <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Bless you for finding that. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deraldin Posted October 29, 2005 Share Posted October 29, 2005 (edited) I high excruciatingly high standards for myslef...:D <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Bless you for finding that. :D <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Maybe he was drunk when he posted that. " Or maybe it wasn't posted by him and it's a fake quote! Edited October 29, 2005 by Deraldin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reveilled Posted October 29, 2005 Share Posted October 29, 2005 Oh no its the light/colour thread all over again!! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Oh god, it is, isn't it? In fact, Meta, forget I said anything. I'm not that eager to have this argument again. Hawk! Eggplant! AWAKEN! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deraldin Posted October 29, 2005 Share Posted October 29, 2005 Oh no its the light/colour thread all over again!! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Hey, that thread was fun! I enjoyed reading that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reveilled Posted October 29, 2005 Share Posted October 29, 2005 Oh no its the light/colour thread all over again!! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Hey, that thread was fun! I enjoyed reading that one. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Bleuch. First we'd argue over one word, then we'd argue over a word in the definition, then a word in that word's definition. Urgh. If it hadn't finished when it did, Meta and I would probably have been arguing in Proto-Indo-European eventually. Hawk! Eggplant! AWAKEN! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metadigital Posted October 29, 2005 Share Posted October 29, 2005 kotorkyle implicitly posits the hypothesis that Gabrielle is more senior, but does not directly affirm this to be a fact, either known to, or confirmed by, him (her);my exterpolation of the original statement may be regarded as editing (for sure), but it was done within the spirit of clarification and not for any malevolent purposes, so it is at worst artistic licence and in no way poor grammar; No, it's still poor grammar. You changed the sentence from an assertion about the relative ages of kotorkyle and gabrielle to an assertion about the presence of a suspicion about the relative ages of the two. The first makes an assertion about the ages, the second raises a possibility. Even if it's artistic licence, and even if it was not done for any malevolent purposes, the meaning of the sentence has still been changed, thus there has been a change, rather than a correction, in the grammar. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No, it is completely outside the boundaries of grammar. It is within editorial licence for the reader to interpret as they will. In fact, the structure of my correction not only presents a fair and clear interpretation, it also grants the reader the immediate power of recognising what is edit and what is the original statement. To wit, the correction was helping to state what kotorkyle meant to say, even though poor grammar and eloquence prevented such communication. OBSCVRVM PER OBSCVRIVS ET IGNOTVM PER IGNOTIVS OPVS ARTIFICEM PROBAT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deraldin Posted October 29, 2005 Share Posted October 29, 2005 Bleuch. First we'd argue over one word, then we'd argue over a word in the definition, then a word in that word's definition. Urgh. If it hadn't finished when it did, Meta and I would probably have been arguing in Proto-Indo-European eventually. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yeah but that was part of the fun! Watching you two nit pick every little thing in each others posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metadigital Posted October 29, 2005 Share Posted October 29, 2005 I high excruciatingly high standards for myslef...:D <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Bless you for finding that. :D <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Good on you for finding that! I don't let too many mistakes slip past me ... (... then again I remember I was posting without the luxury of revising my posts as I had a pressing time constraint, but that smacks of an excuse and I am not so vainglorious that I cannot admit to mistakes). No errors, mind you, just mistakes. :D OBSCVRVM PER OBSCVRIVS ET IGNOTVM PER IGNOTIVS OPVS ARTIFICEM PROBAT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancer Posted October 29, 2005 Share Posted October 29, 2005 (edited) PC, although the Sega Genesis/Megadrive was number one for me for a long time. EDIT: Why is the Genesis/Megadrive not in this poll? If the SNES is in it, the Genesis/Megadrive deserves to be in it too. Edited October 29, 2005 by Lancer Lancer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkreku Posted October 29, 2005 Share Posted October 29, 2005 Played it on the GC. Wouldnt happen to know of any significant differences would you ? Definately qualifies as fantastic anyway. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well, there's supposed to be a 5 hour storyline where you get to play as Ada, the girl in the red dress. I am sure you remember her.. and her cleavage.. and long legs.. Also, new weapons, new costumes for the main characters and some other stuff. Nothing worth paying an extra $50 for. Unless you're made of money. Swedes, go to: Spel2, for the latest game reviews in swedish! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabrielle Posted October 29, 2005 Share Posted October 29, 2005 Where's the Atari 2600? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now