- #141
BicycleTree
- 520
- 0
That's very clever how you misspelled "truly" to emphasize the reference to the word "true." It would have been sufficient just to say "truly," I would have gotten it. But I appreciate the extra effort.
And you are truly pedantic. Pompous and pedantic.BicycleTree said:That's very clever how you misspelled "truly" to emphasize the reference to the word "true." It would have been sufficient just to say "truly," I would have gotten it. But I appreciate the extra effort.
The SAT is the American version of Britain's A-levels.brewnog said:Being a non-USian, I don't know what these SAT thingies are
The longest "discussion" threads (not joke threads) almost always center around the "argument" dynamic. They thrive on people not seeming to understand each other. Threads where people agree at the start, or soon come to an agreement, don't last very long. I don't think BicycleTree had too much of a point to make. I think he just wanted a big dose of attention and knew that the surest way to get it was to keep the argument going.Huckleberry said:In a normal conversation it becomes clear very quickly when there is a misunderstanding. If misunderstanding happen all the time then it is a degradation of the argument. This argument has degraded.
BicycleTree said:nobody on these boards is significantly more qualified to interpret English than I am. (assuming we have no professional grammarians in the house)
Keep in mind, Mr. Nog, that this is a fellow who lives and dies by the holy scripture of the 'American Heritage Dictionary'.brewnog said:You're a stuck-up, egotistical, arrogant, abrasive little character aren't you?
And, you're wrong too.
Ohh, is it so wrong to feed a troll?
Sort of leaves you wondering about the intent of someone starting a discussion thread with the premise that unless you're perfect, you shouldn't engage in discussion, doesn't it? That sort of attitude runs entirely counter to the objectives of this site, which is that of learning. We assume that people coming here to ask questions are not perfect in their knowledge (well, geez, as if anyone is perfect ), and thus engage in discussions in an attempt to improve what they know and understand. To even begin a discussion with the intent of excluding people from discussion (anyone who does not pass or refuses to take some arbitrary test) is highly suspect. When a discussion continues and someone begins suggesting others should leave the discussion when it becomes apparent they are not in agreement, what could possibly be the point? When it yet further continues and someone continues to maintain their position they are 100% correct even in the face of evidence to the contrary, and rather than support their argument with their own evidence, simply dismisses the evidence presented as wrong because it doesn't agree with them, then it becomes clear that there was no intention of initiating any actual discussion.Soilwork said:This place is to relax and unless people are abusing other members I think they're qualified enough to post their thoughts in a public forum. :)