T1B

Screw_Michigan wrote:I stand corrected, shitstain.

You stand... barely, after that asswhooping you just laid on yourself.


What, exactly, did you learn at this so called "school" you claim to have attended?

...and even there these rules are subject to constant debate among British and American writers, especially concerning the placement of and even the necessary inclusion of commas.

Oh, and this "rule" is utterly absurd...

Rule 6. Do not use quotation marks with quoted material that is more than three lines in length.

There are so many exceptions to this one as to make it completely worthless.

Van wrote:...and even there these rules are subject to constant debate among British and American writers, especially concerning the placement of and even the necessary inclusion of commas.

Damn... just when I thought SM had set the bar of dumbass at unattainable levels.


No, Vannie -- the rules of American English are pretty steadfast as far as punctuation.

You DO realize that American English and English are (slightly) different languages, RIGHT?

You probably should have left the self-inflicted asskickings to Screwy -- not that you aren't an exceptional talent in that department, as well.

Punctuation in English is much different FROM (revisiting your previous bout of linguistic clowning) American English. The usage of quotation marks is completely different, as are the period and comma rules that go with them.

Which simple logic dictates that there's nothing to "debate." Or if we're using English -- there's nothing to 'debate'.


I grew up writing in both languages. Laughing over here. And not 'laughing with you'.

Van wrote:...and even there these rules are subject to constant debate among British and American writers, especially concerning the placement of and even the necessary inclusion of commas.

Meh, who gives a fuck. The best writers throughout history never much cared for rules.

Dins, you're so completely off base on this one as to be laughable. The use of punctuation between British and American writers varies drastically, and if you aren't aware of this, well, you are Dins, which roughly translates to...

"Speak loudly, then speak more loudly...never mind being correct."

Here's a little hint for you, champ, since you posted that Tolkien parody...

...go read some Tolkien. Note the type, placement and usage of his quotation marks. Pay attention to his use of commas. He was an esteemed professor of English at Oxford and quite the well-respected writer, and he says you're a total fucking douche. John LeCarre says you're a tool as well, and there are hordes of other writers who are in total agreement that you haven't a clue, per usual.

The use of commas, subordinating conjunction clauses and punctuation with quotes is very fluid between the two 'disciplines', to the point that there are barely any hard-and-fast rules governing much if any of this shit.

Note the use of "air quotes" and the subsequent placement of the second comma outside the quote in the above sentence.

Strunk is about as relevant these days as Kajagoogoo.

Mgo wrote:

Van wrote:...and even there these rules are subject to constant debate among British and American writers, especially concerning the placement of and even the necessary inclusion of commas.

Meh, who gives a fuck. The best writers throughout history never much cared for rules.

Precisely my point. There barely are any rules governing so much of what Dins seems to think is so ironclad.

You'll always be OK if you include a '(sic).' Because then it's somebody else's fault.

Note that it must be "italicized".

Van wrote:The use of punctuation between British and American writers varies drastically

Did I mention I grew up writing in both languages?

That difference you cite is because...


sitting down?

IT'S BECAUSE THEY ARE DIFFERENT LANGUAGES WITH DIFFERENT PUNCTUATION RULES.

Clear enough?

It's not some mysterious difference in some intercontinental stylizations -- IT'S A DIFFERENT FUCKING LANGUAGE.

So yes, British writers will invariably use different punctuation FROM their American counterparts... SINCE THE RULES ARE DIFFERENT.

Your take of "there are no punctuation rules, since British writers use punctuation differently than [sic for Van] American writers" is so patently absurd, I'm actually having trouble even comprehending such an extreme departure from any sort of logic.

Gee, I'll bet Mandarin writers punctuate things differently from American writers, too. Must mean they don't have punctuation rules, eh?

Great, so you're agreeing with me. Do you even have a point here, beyond "from/than"?

If not, let's talk about Greg Oden.

Van wrote:Great, so you're agreeing with me.

Straight from the TVO playbook?

Really?

If not, let's talk about Greg Oden.

Dude busted a move... sort of.

After his postseason exit interview with KP (everyone has one after every season), KP said "Well, it was a tough year with your injury, but I'd like to talk about our goals for next year."


GOGOGO's response: "Nope."

KP: Uhm, that's why we do the interviews.

GO: Nope. I'm officially done talking about what I'm going to do. Soon, we'll start talking about what I did.

Then he walked out.

If the growing 21 year old giant can get some healthy knees, watch out -- he's grown quite confident... and quite strong in the weight room.

Crack on the guy all you want (how did Bynum's career start again?), but when he's on the floor, he really electrifies the home arena... and posterizes fools at an alarming clip.

He's well on his way to becoming Bill Walton (feet) or Arvidas Sabonis (was it his back? ), minus any of their success.

To be that big while already suffering from knee issues at the age of twenty? Doesn't bode well.

Meanwhile...

Hey, U&L!



-Kevin Durant

Van wrote:
Hey, U&L!

:lol: :hfal: :lol: :hfal:

-Kevin Durant

Still not interested, would still take the rare athletic big.

Because goodness knows, the Zers don't have enough guys who can shamelessly jack it up.

He'd screw up BRoy's groove, and sorry, but BROY is a better player (injury plagued fuck).

While KD Long is a remarkable scorer, and exactly what the Blunder needed to build on, I'm still not all that enamored with him. I've been following the boxscores for... well, forever, but over the last 3 seasons (we'll call it 2 though, since him guarding 2's was asinine), if you check the stats, there's a good rule-of-thumb -- if you want to have a career night from the floor, line up against KD. It's a rare night the guy he's "covering" doesn't shoot over 50%.

His 30 a night at the one end costs at least that at the other. While Stern and his Merry Band of Riggers has made him the new Poster Child, and his FT attempts reflect it, Kevin Urant (no D there) possibly the biggest defensive liability in the game not named Zach Randolph (Amare has sure stepped it up last couple of years -- he used to make the list).

Fucker can sure score, though. And stays healthy. And seems like a nice enough guy.


It seems the Queens might have something to cheer for again. Tyreke freaking rocks. You should get another like him in this lottery, then boom, fortunes change.

Damn, too bad this site doesn't have an NBA forum to speak of.

Lessee here...

A 1st team All-NBA guy who's still only a pup, or a chronically injured guy who may never make a serious impact in the league other than for the paycheck he picks up every two weeks?

Yeah, Brandon Roy or not, if Portland had themselves a time machine and a big ass Mulligan in the bag, KD would be a 'Zer and Oden would be languishing in OKC's training room while his teammates went 20-62 for the season.

I love Oden, but this is beginning to look worse than Sam Bowie-MJ, since Bowie was at least a serviceable player for a decent while.

Van wrote:Sam Bowie-MJ, since Bowie was at least a serviceable player for a decent while.

Well, that and the fact Bowie was a better college player -- did it all, where Jordan went to the hole. History seems to forget that, along with Houston's very odd selection... didn't they use the #1 pick the year before on a big, when the "missing piece" was the 2? The Blazers drafted a 2 the year before, and was shipping out an All Star to be replaced by the HoFer -- no need for a 2. But Clyde could have played the 3.

It should have gone 1 Jordan, 2 Dream, 3 Bowie. That was a goofy draft.

Bowie rocked, even after the first injury... the next 20 injuries... not so much. Was decent, and we traded for Buck Williams, so it worked out in the end.

Chuckster would have been a good choice too. Mailman. That was quite a year.

Oden just plays center for the Blazers, that's his problem. They've all been jinxed, every last one of them. Kevin Duckworth died from the freaking Curse, for goodness' sake.


Portland -- where big men go to die... literally.

Can't we just stop making excuses and agree that Portland sux at teh draft?

Dins, you mixed up Stockton with Malone in that draft, but yeah, that was truly an incredible draft.

Van wrote:...and even there these rules are subject to constant debate among British and American writers, especially concerning the placement of and even the necessary inclusion of commas.

Huh?

Dinsdale wrote: Oden just plays center for the Blazers, that's his problem. They've all been jinxed, every last one of them. Kevin Duckworth died from the freaking Curse, for goodness' sake.


Portland -- where big men go to die... literally.

And speaking of the Curse -- I'm fearful for Chris Dudley right about now. He's likely going to be...

and I'm not kidding...

He's got a really good chance at being the next Governor of Oregon.

Considering his previous job (center for the Blazers), don't be surprised if he drops dead while being sworn in.

Dinsdale wrote:

Van wrote:Great, so you're agreeing with me.

Straight from the TVO playbook?

Huh?

Moving Sale wrote: Huh?

Moving Sale again wrote: Huh?

Still having trouble following along, shorty?

TVO wrote:

...and even there these rules are subject to constant debate among British and American writers, especially concerning the placement of and even the necessary inclusion of commas.

Huh?

I'll try to TVO it down for ya...

Vapid Limey fucksticks and racist, douche-flavored American retards do not follow the same 'rules' when it comes to writing, especially where it concerns commas and quotes.

The Brits often eschew subordination conjunction commas as well as commas separating two complete-sentence phrases within a sentence. They also have a completely different set of ideas as to how to use quotation makes, especially in conjunction with commas, which, again, they often eschew.

Examples...

Limey version: TVO called mvscal a vapid, racist fuckstick and mvscal merely laughed at such a weak retort.

American version: TVO called mvscal a vapid, racist fuckstick, and mvscal merely laughed at such a weak retort.

'Proper' American English requires the use of that comma to separate those two complete phrases; the Brits don't. They let the word 'and' suffice for the comma.

Limey version: 'Hey, TVO said, "Them lesbo bitches were hotter than fuck and those sluts wanted my cack, swear to god!" What was I supposed to do, call him a delusional fag hag?'

American version: "Hey, TVO said, 'Them lesbo bitches were hotter than fuck, and those sluts wanted my cack, swear to god!' What was I supposed to do, call him a delusional fag hag?"

Admittedly this isn't seen as often in more modern British writings, but it's still there, and that's how Tolkien did it.

Limey version: When I want your brain-dead opinion I'll log onto vapidracistfuckchip.com, okay?

American version: When I want your brain-dead opinion, I'll log onto vapidracistfuckchip.com, okay?

The Americans often insist on that subordinating conjunction comma while the Brits often don't bother.

Limey version: 'You need to go ahead and eat my ass. That's what you call "evidence", douchemop?' said Lil' TVO, gleefully parroting the latest pithy bon mot he'd heard his pop use during closing arguments.

American version: "You need to go ahead and eat my ass. That's what you call 'evidence,' douchemop?" said Lil' TVO, gleefully parroting the latest pithy bon mot he'd heard his pop use during closing arguments.

Then there are TVO's Rules for Bitchin' Writing and Stuff, which seem to follow no discernible pattern whatsoever beyond that which can be gleaned from a conversation with the swollen worm at the bottom of a tequila bottle.

Have rugs been munched?

" She played softball: When she worked at the University of Chicago, she played softball. There are pictures to prove it. Sorry, but softball=lesbian."

Terminal fugliness=lesbian.

I'm gonna retract my standing corrected comment because a bunch of handwringing tards in this thread have proven me correct.

Screw_Michigan wrote:I'm gonna retract my standing corrected comment because a bunch of handwringing tards in this thread have proven me correct.

So you believe that because a bunch wetbrained fucktards make the same mistakes that you do, that somehow makes you right?