ADVERTISEMENT

Boyscouts

Hey, I didn't say anyone would read it, just that I was going to write it. And it will center around why I was in D.C. . . . if I am not killed before then.

Huh?

Either the Rangers or the HCBU mafia has a hit out on you or you messed around with someone's wife?

Hypothetically speaking, if we did a YAGs office pool for the culprit, who/what would be best odds to win?
 
Rifle beat me to it. The use of someone/their isn't even a subject verb agreement issue. It's a gender issue. "Their" is a genderless possessive pronoun...not a verb.

It's a very informal style of writing. You should know this, Professor. Are you saying if you were to write a research paper, you would write in that style? By the way, "their" is still considered to be a plural pronoun. Your argument regarding gender assignment isn't the issue in Greed's post.
 
Still upset about not knowing all the applications of the word bullshit?

No, Greed, what you typed was not fine. You can choose to make that error if you want or listen to ExtraRifle, who knows a little bit about a lot of different things, which makes him a self-proclaimed expert on everything.

If you have concerns, feel free to contact Dr. Stook if he's still alive and/or teaching English at Marshall.


So, you're going to reject what the leading authorities say on the matter yet listen to what a Marshall professor (who gets his teachings from the same publications) told you ten years ago? Brilliant!

There is no debating this. Two of the three leading authorities on this all recently agreed with exactly what I said (hence, the reason for me arguing that way). The third hasn't taken a stance on the issue.

You're wrong. The professor is (if he still teaches it) wrong.

And for the record, I know more about proper grammar than plenty of college English professors.
 
It's a very informal style of writing. You should know this, Professor. Are you saying if you were to write a research paper, you would write in that style? By the way, "their" is still considered to be a plural pronoun. Your argument regarding gender assignment isn't the issue in Greed's post.

Bullshit (note the proper use of the word). It isn't just for "very informal" styles of writing. The fvcking AP Stylebook and Chicago Manual have both ruled on it. They, especially the latter, aren't representative of "very informal" writing styles.

Why are people so dumb to admit that they fvcked up instead of trying to argue the experts on this?
 
And, please, learn the correct use of "irony." Me accusing somebody of doing something and you accusing me of being exactly like that isn't an example of irony.
 
You're the one who made the accusation. So, list them since you claim that I argue experts all of the time.

Okay 30CAT, take that approach if you would like. I'm not digging through countless posts to find when you've done this. It's a well known fact that you will argue the validity of any "experts" besides the ones being used to support your stance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 19MU88
Okay 30CAT, take that approach if you would like. I'm not digging through countless posts to find when you've done this. It's a well known fact that you will argue the validity of any "experts" besides the ones being used to support your stance.

You shouldn't have to dig through quotes. If it's so common like you claim, you should be able to easily note at least a few instances. But you can't do that, and we both know why.

Now, are you willing to admit that the leading grammar authorities refute your attempt at correcting E.T. and you don't know the proper use of "irony?"
 
You shouldn't have to dig through quotes. If it's so common like you claim, you should be able to easily note at least a few instances. But you can't do that, and we both know why.

Now, are you willing to admit that the leading grammar authorities refute your attempt at correcting E.T. and you don't know the proper use of "irony?"

As soon as you admit you didn't know what you were talking about when attempting to define the term "bullshit."

Apparently, you are arguing with the experts at Merriam-Webster.
 
Last edited:
@extragreen , on behalf of @mlblack16. , I apologize for him being entirely wrong with his attempt to correct you, during which, he mocked your intelligence.

@mlblack16. , I apologize for damaging your ego and exposing your foolishness to the rest of the board.

Instead of paying Marshall thousands to have a professor teach you incorrectly, you could have just asked me.
 
@extragreen , on behalf of @mlblack16. , I apologize for him being entirely wrong with his attempt to correct you, during which, he mocked your intelligence.

@mlblack16. , I apologize for damaging your ego and exposing your foolishness to the rest of the board.

Instead of paying Marshall thousands to have a professor teach you incorrectly, you could have just asked me.

I haven't seen anyone get under your skin this badly in quite some time, ExtraRifle. I accept your form of flattery.
 
It's a very informal style of writing. You should know this, Professor. Are you saying if you were to write a research paper, you would write in that style? By the way, "their" is still considered to be a plural pronoun. Your argument regarding gender assignment isn't the issue in Greed's post.

I see your point on it being a singular/plural issue (someone-their), but you incorrectly stated this as a subject/verb agreement issue when it isn't. It is a pronoun/antecedent agreement issue. There is more to it than just agreeing in number (singular/plural). It must also agree in gender. Using his/her with the indefinite pronoun "someone" is what I was referring to on the gender agreement.

I personally would have written the sentence you called out exactly like you did...someone-his/her. But as rifle pointed out, traditional usage of language isn't always cut and dry. For example, starting sentences with conjunctions has been taught as being incorrect by some, yet great literature is full of examples of writers that practice it. I think the issue here is if the argument has digressed to the point of calling out grammar errors, then we are opening ourselves to people calling out our own.

Because (I started sentence with subordinate conjunction...it's okay) it was EG and you disagree politically with him, you were quick to point out what you believed to be a mistake. The truth is, everyone on here makes mistakes in grammar. Not because they're uneducated or dumb, but because when you don't proofread you make mistakes.

I swore I wouldn't take up for EG, but poor grammar isn't a fault of his.
 
And EG...if you try to make me answer a question about free falling objects I'm really going to quit taking up for you this time.
 
Because (I started sentence with subordinate conjunction...it's okay) it was EG and you disagree politically with him, you were quick to point out what you believed to be a mistake. The truth is, everyone on here makes mistakes in grammar. Not because they're uneducated or dumb, but because when you don't proofread you make mistakes.

I swore I wouldn't take up for EG, but poor grammar isn't a fault of his.

Fair enough, but the fact remains that EG throws the term, "moron" at everyone on here who dares challenge him. This is why I called him out on his mistake.
 
Just to get this thread back on track...

37660911.jpg
 
And EG...if you try to make me answer a question about free falling objects I'm really going to quit taking up for you this time.

There's battle lines being drawn
Nobody's right if everybody's wrong
Young people speaking' their minds
Getting so much RESISTANCE from behind

heh heh
 
There's battle lines being drawn
Nobody's right if everybody's wrong
Young people speaking' their minds
Getting so much RESISTANCE from behind

heh heh


Paranoia strikes deep
Into your life it will creep
It starts when you're always afraid
You step out of line, the man come and take you away
 
Why? Because we all aren't rednecks who think it's cool to make loud noises that the entire neighborhood has to be disrupted by.

It's not cool when the 20 year old pulls out of his mom's driveway with his bass blasting and proceeds to warn the neighborhood that he is driving down the street due to being able to hear his bass. It's not cool, regardless if 3 pm or 3 am, a redneck wants to light off fireworks for 20 minutes forcing the entire neighborhood to deal with the noise.

Why should I have to be awakened due to the constant loud noise you are making that can be heard for blocks? Why should my hypothetical dog have to be constantly scared in my house and bark due to you making loud, frequent noise? It's rude and self-serving. There is a reason for noise ordinances.

You'd be the worst type of neighbor to have.

First, I never said any of those things were "cool."

Second, I haven't purchased a firework since I was a kid.

My point is, it's ridiculous to get so offended by a brief annoyance that you would involve the police. Lighten up, Francis.
 
First, I never said any of those things were "cool."

Second, I haven't purchased a firework since I was a kid.

My point is, it's ridiculous to get so offended by a brief annoyance that you would involve the police. Lighten up, Francis.

I hardly doubt anyone is offended by the fireworks. They are annoyed that the fireworks woke them up, made their babies cry, scared their pets, etc.

Living in a neighborhood means you have to be somewhat tolerant of certain things; kids laughing or screaming when they are running around playing, an occasional barking dog, etc. But when things are done for personal enjoyment without the thoughtfulness to question whether it will bother somebody else, especially when it is illegal, then it is time to make it stop.

If that 20 year old kid blasts his bass each time he leaves/arrives at his house and it is a noise issue multiple times per day, I will say something. If a neighbor's dog barks incessantly each day they put it outside, I will say something. If you live in a neighborhood and are throwing a large outdoor party that will have music, be noisy, etc., it is common courtesy to invite the neighbors and/or ask them if they care if you are having a celebration that evening and will be a little loud throughout the night.

It's common courtesy. People setting off loud fireworks throughout the night without caring if it will bother the neighbors are unthoughtful, selfish, pieces of shit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: murox
I guess Disney World is run by a bunch of rednecks because they shoot off fireworks every night. Ditto every NFL and MLB stadium in the country, every soccer arena on earth, and basically anybody who isn't riflearm.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ThunderCat98
I hardly doubt anyone is offended by the fireworks. They are annoyed that the fireworks woke them up, made their babies cry, scared their pets, etc.

Living in a neighborhood means you have to be somewhat tolerant of certain things; kids laughing or screaming when they are running around playing, an occasional barking dog, etc. But when things are done for personal enjoyment without the thoughtfulness to question whether it will bother somebody else, especially when it is illegal, then it is time to make it stop.

If that 20 year old kid blasts his bass each time he leaves/arrives at his house and it is a noise issue multiple times per day, I will say something. If a neighbor's dog barks incessantly each day they put it outside, I will say something. If you live in a neighborhood and are throwing a large outdoor party that will have music, be noisy, etc., it is common courtesy to invite the neighbors and/or ask them if they care if you are having a celebration that evening and will be a little loud throughout the night.

It's common courtesy. People setting off loud fireworks throughout the night without caring if it will bother the neighbors are unthoughtful, selfish, pieces of shit.
It wasn't in the middle of the night. 9 or 10pm
 
I guess Disney World is run by a bunch of rednecks because they shoot off fireworks every night. Ditto every NFL and MLB stadium in the country, every soccer arena on earth, and basically anybody who isn't riflearm.

Yes, because fireworks you see at a Disney are exactly like the amateur hour spectacles rednecks shoot off.

And all of those neighborhoods that don't exist around Disney sure are bothered by the fireworks they can't hear or see.

Apples vs. vinyl siding.
 
  • Like
Reactions: goherd73
It wasn't in the middle of the night. 9 or 10pm

Where'd I say anything about middle of the night? It doesn't matter what time of day it is.

There isn't a reason nice neighborhoods have rules you must adhere to (not cutting grass during the times most people are sleeping, not painting your house neon green, not leaving your trashcan at the curb over night, not having your broken down car in your yard, not making unreasonable levels of noise, etc.). Those rules are made because too many morons aren't considerate and see no problem with making a high level of noise at 10 pm.

The rest of you rednecks can go live in those other areas.
 
  • Like
Reactions: murox
Where'd I say anything about middle of the night? It doesn't matter what time of day it is.

There isn't a reason nice neighborhoods have rules you must adhere to (not cutting grass during the times most people are sleeping, not painting your house neon green, not leaving your trashcan at the curb over night, not having your broken down car in your yard, not making unreasonable levels of noise, etc.). Those rules are made because too many morons aren't considerate and see no problem with making a high level of noise at 10 pm.

The rest of you rednecks can go live in those other areas.
You stated it in the last paragraph of your rant about fireworks.
 
There isn't a reason nice neighborhoods have rules you must adhere to (not cutting grass during the times most people are sleeping, not painting your house neon green, not leaving your trashcan at the curb over night, not having your broken down car in your yard, not making unreasonable levels of noise, etc.). Those rules are made because too many morons aren't considerate and see no problem with making a high level of noise at 10 pm.

What if you had a Muslim neighbor who wanted to erect a huge statue to Allah in his/her front yard? (note, that I'm referring to one person, so a plural pronoun isn't appropriate)

If there are rules for the development where you live which prevent that, wouldn't the very act of preventing this Muslim neighbor be considered xenophobic, racist, and all the other terms used by liberals these days?
 
Man, it's a crazy thread when a Mod gets his post deleted

If a post that I make is not up to the high "ARandomHerdFan" standards, I will delete it and start over.

Sometimes, someone is quick on the draw and quotes me before I do that.

tl;dr - My post sucked, so I nixed it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mlblack16.
What if you had a Muslim neighbor who wanted to erect a huge statue to Allah in his/her front yard? (note, that I'm referring to one person, so a plural pronoun isn't appropriate)

You can still do as you have done in the past. It doesn't change the fact that what you tried correcting of E.T.'s was wrong on your part.


If there are rules for the development where you live which prevent that, wouldn't the very act of preventing this Muslim neighbor be considered xenophobic, racist, and all the other terms used by liberals these days?

Ya' know, once in a while, I start to pat myself on the back for increasing the level of discourse and intelligence on here. I've seen grammar make significant strides from long-time posters. I've seen much better arguments being presented. Hell, I even take responsibility for turning 30kitty into the monster he became, because my constant bashing of him on the smack board made him argue more logically than when he first came on board. But after about the third pat on my back, before my bulging biceps start to get sore, I end up reading an attempt at logic like the post I just quoted and everything falls to shit.

If there were rules that specifically prohibited one religion from putting a statue in their front yard, then it would be discriminatory. If there were rules preventing statues from all religions except for one from having the statue, it would be biased. If there were rules preventing any religious statue from being displayed, it would be fair.

So the simple answer to your flawed question is "no." Now, some townships have tried getting around that clear prejudice by being creative. In one community, a Muslim group wanted to build a mosque on land which didn't prohibit that type of structure. Yet, the town board denied it by quickly passing a new ordinance prohibiting religious-based buildings on that specific land. Of course, they lost in court and ended up paying the Muslim group a large amount of money since they clearly only passed the ordinance to stop the mosque. It isn't much different than why cheeto's Muslim ban was illegal even though "it didn't ban all Muslims so it can't be a Muslim ban!"
 
Where'd I say anything about middle of the night? It doesn't matter what time of day it is.

There isn't a reason nice neighborhoods have rules you must adhere to (not cutting grass during the times most people are sleeping, not painting your house neon green, not leaving your trashcan at the curb over night, not having your broken down car in your yard, not making unreasonable levels of noise, etc.). Those rules are made because too many morons aren't considerate and see no problem with making a high level of noise at 10 pm.

The rest of you rednecks can go live in those other areas.

Wonder if the have rules like that in tiny house neighborhoods . . .:D
 
You stated it in the last paragraph of your rant about fireworks.

No, I didn't.

Wonder if the have rules like that in tiny house neighborhoods . . .:D

It's exactly the reason why they have a niche. People who don't want to deal with rednecks who set off fireworks can just move somewhere quieter, more peaceful, and a greater distance away from rednecks.
 
ADVERTISEMENT