geekhack
geekhack Community => Off Topic => Topic started by: DALExSNAIL on Thu, 12 July 2018, 09:55:15
-
Stop confusing 'loose' and 'lose'
-
Nice
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
-
I think we should just Merge, and it's fine..
Do we really need so many versions ?
Then Than, etc
It's Its...
-
Also stop referring to a single individual as "they". Someone, anyone, and no one refer to one person.
-
Also stop referring to a single individual as "they".
The singular "they" has been accepted in common usage for quite a while.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/singular-nonbinary-they (https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/singular-nonbinary-they)
-
dude stop being a looser
-
I'm sorry. I will not touch any more screws.
-
I'm sorry. I will not touch any more screws.
At what point will Gekhak initiate
~ 2018 Female++ Super Plan.. ~
-
Moose or meese?
-
Moose or meese?
moosen
-
Moose or meese?
moosi
-
Moose or meese?
Totes meese.
And if you want to be too edgemus, it's
eseemenona.
-
Moose or meese?
Totes meese.
And if you want to be too edgemus, it's
eseemenona.
Wha bou,, / Mexicans.. !!
-
Moose or meese?
Totes meese.
And if you want to be too edgemus, it's
eseemenona.
Wha bou,, / Mexicans.. !!
Then just esoomenona or demikscrewedmeintheass.
-
Their it is, another pointless thread! Please don't waist my time with this sort of stuff :mad:
-
Moose or meese?
I think the term is banned
-
Moose or meese?
I think the term is banned
Do you mean the term for the person who's been banned or do you mean the plural of the word has been banned?
-
Moose or meese?
I think the term is banned
Do you mean the term for the person who's been banned or do you mean the plural of the word has been banned?
Your pick!
-
Moose or meese?
I think the term is banned
Do you mean the term for the person who's been banned or do you mean the plural of the word has been banned?
nesoomenona
-
Moose or meese?
I think the term is banned
Do you mean the term for the person who's been banned or do you mean the plural of the word has been banned?
nesoomenona
eseemenona?
so hard to write backwards :/
-
Moose or meese?
I think the term is banned
Do you mean the term for the person who's been banned or do you mean the plural of the word has been banned?
nesoomenona
eseemenano ?
nesomenano
-
.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
-
Moose or meese?
moosen
:))
-
Moose or meese?
I think the term is banned
Do you mean the term for the person who's been banned or do you mean the plural of the word has been banned?
nesoomenona
eseemenona?
so hard to write backwards :/
I had to write it like three times...
-
They ate some lose popcorns.
-
Their it is, another pointless thread! Please don't waist my time with this sort of stuff :mad:
I think I see what you did there, but I don't know. :blank: :blank: :blank:
-
nothing to loose your sh*t over. ;D
-
Also stop referring to a single individual as "they".
The singular "they" has been accepted in common usage for quite a while.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/singular-nonbinary-they (https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/singular-nonbinary-they)
As a prescriptive grammarian, I consider it wrong since it violates pronoun-antecedent agreement. Despite predating Modern English, it is legitimately confusing in some instances. It's also not needed when referring to a hypothetical person who won't be offended (A person, the user, somebody). It also makes no sense when the speaker is certain of the antecedent's sex. It makes even less sense when a writer or speaker spontaneously switches between "they" and "he or she"; at least, pick one and stick with it.
This and not using the past participle in the present perfect and past perfect tenses are my two biggest peeves (e.g. "I should've went!", "I just got bit by a mosquito!"). EDIT: That last one is passive, not present or past perfect.
-
The only one that gets to me is noone.
Come one people, it never even looks right.
-
As a prescriptive grammarian, I consider it wrong since it violates pronoun-antecedent agreement.
Whether it's grammatically correct or not if it makes someone feel more comfortable about their identity I think that's a net win.
-
It's also not needed when referring to a hypothetical person who won't be offended
It also makes no sense when the speaker is certain of the antecedent's sex.
Unpossible. It's 2018 now.
-
As a prescriptive grammarian, I consider it wrong since it violates pronoun-antecedent agreement.
Whether it's grammatically correct or not if it makes someone feel more comfortable about their identity I think that's a net win.
I see what you did there. :p