I didn't outsmart ya buddy :)Quote:
Originally Posted by ChronicMike
Just showed you something.
Printable View
I didn't outsmart ya buddy :)Quote:
Originally Posted by ChronicMike
Just showed you something.
Yeah you made that post while I was typing, so I didn't see it until afterwards.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChronicMike
Quote:
Originally Posted by Its a Plant
i must have misplaced it...ill get back to ya on it :D
Yo, DRY ONE.
I think you might be mistaken.
Lol, either way, I don't care. ~Quote:
J D Salinger employed the phrase 'strictly for the birds' in Catcher In The Rye (1951), and that seems to be the earliest known usage. In 1957 a writer in the journal American Speech wrote, 'The metaphor alludes to birds eating droppings from horses and cattle'.
For the Birds
Instead of writing an open letter to the birds who pooped all over my car, I'll talk about this other crap from Missouri. I have to share my amazement that 71% of MO could approve a state constitutional ban on gay marriage. Perhaps I am so morally derelict that I am incapable of even comprehending the arguments against gay marriage, but from where I'm standing it seems like 71% of Missouri's populace are bigots.
It seems the biggest argument against allowing homosexuals to marry is that it somehow defiles the sanctity of the union. What exactly this means when the divorce rate is so absurdly high, even in Missouri itself, is unclear to me. What exactly this means when some of the most famous murders of recent history have happened within the bonds of marriage is unclear to me. What sanctity, exactly, is being protect
just a small excerpt :D have a nice day :thumbsup:
read my signiture... i think its still there
yea... the very last quote
oh yeah? Well... your mom.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChronicMike
+1
Although grammar can get bad enough around here to render posts indecipherable, it's not that big of a deal to me. It's not like he is completely out of line by asking for higher standards in this regard (although it did come off a little snotty and presumptuous), but I find this problem works itself out. If someone takes the time to type a coherent and concise message, it generally gets read and replied to more often, reinforcing the behavior of using correct grammar. A block of gibberish gets ignored more often.
But even if conditioning does not extinguish the behavior, you are probably better off NOT reading posts by members who are incabable of constructing a sentence regardless. Are you really losing sleep over the possibility you missed some profound, groundshaking insight buried in the middle of goldnugz420's latest rambling nonsense?
(apologies to goldnugz420 if there is actually such a member)Quote:
Originally Posted by goldnugz420
Ha, I feel like an idiot. Over 90% of my posts can be found with zero periods and a million commas... My bad!Quote:
Originally Posted by Nochowderforyou