Topic: FAP: Syntax
Anonymous A started this discussion 11 years ago #47,460
Can you help me hack Facebook and my local cable provider?
Syntax joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 11 minutes later[^] [v] #622,522
No clue Y you wood want to hack Facebook.
Do you really need a cable provider other then for net connection.
Perhaps you live near a coffee shop with wi-fi - Yagi antenna is super easy to make and you can extend the range so as to piggy back on2 their network
Do you really need a cable provider other then for net connection.
Perhaps you live near a coffee shop with wi-fi - Yagi antenna is super easy to make and you can extend the range so as to piggy back on2 their network
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 15 minutes later, 26 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #622,530
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 6 minutes later, 32 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #622,534
Syntax replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 34 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #622,537
Anonymous E replied with this 11 years ago, 55 seconds later, 35 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #622,538
Syntax replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 39 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #622,543
@previous (E)
Me thinks its really your problem and not mine. Sure my english does not win awards.
Yet I notice that when I post anon I never get gripes about my Inglish.
And today with many replies as Syntax no one not a single person whined about my Inglish
Me thinks its really your problem and not mine. Sure my english does not win awards.
Yet I notice that when I post anon I never get gripes about my Inglish.
And today with many replies as Syntax no one not a single person whined about my Inglish
Anonymous E replied with this 11 years ago, 55 seconds later, 39 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #622,545
Soupie !FaiGWhdD4g joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 3 seconds later, 39 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #622,546
@622,543 (Syntax)
Actually it's because of your 'Inglis' (and nice badly co-opted Scots English) that your anonymous posts are as transparent as fuck to detect.
Actually it's because of your 'Inglis' (and nice badly co-opted Scots English) that your anonymous posts are as transparent as fuck to detect.
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 18 seconds later, 40 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #622,547
Did B or C get shadowbanned?
Syntax replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 42 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #622,550
Soupie !FaiGWhdD4g replied with this 11 years ago, 2 minutes later, 44 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #622,554
@previous (Syntax)
English is written in Scots English as 'Inglis', if sco.wikipedia.org (likely neologistic garbage really) is to be believed.
English is written in Scots English as 'Inglis', if sco.wikipedia.org (likely neologistic garbage really) is to be believed.
Anonymous E replied with this 11 years ago, 25 seconds later, 45 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #622,556
Soupie !FaiGWhdD4g replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 46 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #622,558
@previous (E)
That, honestly, is as well to be the 'illegible gibberish' variation of Wikipedia.
Nobody I know actually speaks Scots English exactly like that, or if they did, it hasn't been the case since the 18th century.
That, honestly, is as well to be the 'illegible gibberish' variation of Wikipedia.
Nobody I know actually speaks Scots English exactly like that, or if they did, it hasn't been the case since the 18th century.
Anonymous G replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 48 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #622,561
Syntax replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 49 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #622,563
@622,554 (Soupie !FaiGWhdD4g)
> English is written in Scots English as 'Inglis',
No shit. That is terrific - Except for some reason a few people give me shit for spelling Wood as Wood and so far no one ever has made mention of me doing as Inglish
Scots cut the s making it shorter so maybe I will remember to do it as Inglis
> English is written in Scots English as 'Inglis',
No shit. That is terrific - Except for some reason a few people give me shit for spelling Wood as Wood and so far no one ever has made mention of me doing as Inglish
Scots cut the s making it shorter so maybe I will remember to do it as Inglis
Anonymous E replied with this 11 years ago, 40 seconds later, 50 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #622,565
Syntax replied with this 11 years ago, 4 minutes later, 54 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #622,567
@previous (E)
Yes sometimes but say in the case of wood - for text speak purposes it wood probably be more better to convert to Wud.
The basis for this goes back to me as kiddlet learning Morse code for my FCC exam. One learns as in texting currently to keep the key strokes to minimum.
I just think wood is more elegant then wud but if I were again doing some Morse code it wood always end up as wud
Yes sometimes but say in the case of wood - for text speak purposes it wood probably be more better to convert to Wud.
The basis for this goes back to me as kiddlet learning Morse code for my FCC exam. One learns as in texting currently to keep the key strokes to minimum.
I just think wood is more elegant then wud but if I were again doing some Morse code it wood always end up as wud
Anonymous E replied with this 11 years ago, 2 minutes later, 57 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #622,569
Syntax replied with this 11 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #622,574
@previous (E)
One occasion I will coin a new word in r/l and get a smile
Esoteric - We Engineers are often guilty of using a real word that is only understood by other Engineers.
So I don't think I wood be guilty of a esoteric new coined word
One occasion I will coin a new word in r/l and get a smile
Esoteric - We Engineers are often guilty of using a real word that is only understood by other Engineers.
So I don't think I wood be guilty of a esoteric new coined word
Anonymous E replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #622,576
@previous (Syntax)
I have five questions. Are you willing to answer all five of them? None of them require that you divulge personal information.
I have five questions. Are you willing to answer all five of them? None of them require that you divulge personal information.
Syntax replied with this 11 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #622,577
@previous (E)
Since when am I guilty of not answering a question
I am however under the gun re certain stock purchasing questions (currently)
So shoot
Since when am I guilty of not answering a question
I am however under the gun re certain stock purchasing questions (currently)
So shoot
Anonymous E replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #622,578
@previous (Syntax)
1. Are you capable of typing the letter "W" on your keyboard?
2. Are you capable of typing the letter "O" on your keyboard?
3. Are you capable of typing the letter "U" on your keyboard?
4. Are you capable of typing the letter "L" on your keyboard?
5. Are you capable of typing the letter "D" on your keyboard?
1. Are you capable of typing the letter "W" on your keyboard?
2. Are you capable of typing the letter "O" on your keyboard?
3. Are you capable of typing the letter "U" on your keyboard?
4. Are you capable of typing the letter "L" on your keyboard?
5. Are you capable of typing the letter "D" on your keyboard?
Syntax replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #622,580
@previous (E)
WoW you wood make it all to easy for me
So yes to all five. Can you show me an example where I do not use such letters on my keyboard?
WoW you wood make it all to easy for me
So yes to all five. Can you show me an example where I do not use such letters on my keyboard?
Anonymous E replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #622,583
@previous (Syntax)
So you admit that you are capable of using those five letters on your keyboard? If so, why do you not use all of them in sequence to type something other than illegible gibberish?
So you admit that you are capable of using those five letters on your keyboard? If so, why do you not use all of them in sequence to type something other than illegible gibberish?
Syntax replied with this 11 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #622,590
Anonymous E replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #622,592
Syntax replied with this 11 years ago, 6 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #622,597
@previous (E)
Shall we consider the value of using wood in all cases to convey the message.
One letter saved is conservation of energy. From my wrist to the bandwidth used to transmit the message to the servers/routers line repeaters switches to convey the message.
Look at energy saved to power and cool the servers and all ancillary electronic parts. Fossil fuel is contributing to foul air and global warming. One less letter is helping to save the planet
Me going Green and u demanding me not is not so much so cool of u
idk y u r upset
Shall we consider the value of using wood in all cases to convey the message.
One letter saved is conservation of energy. From my wrist to the bandwidth used to transmit the message to the servers/routers line repeaters switches to convey the message.
Look at energy saved to power and cool the servers and all ancillary electronic parts. Fossil fuel is contributing to foul air and global warming. One less letter is helping to save the planet
Me going Green and u demanding me not is not so much so cool of u
idk y u r upset
Anonymous E replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #622,599
@previous (Syntax)
> Shall we consider the value of using wood in all cases to convey the message.
You look like an ass when you deliberately misspell such a simple word.
> One letter saved is conservation of energy.
...and yet you spend so much energy typing illegible gibberish, like this:
> From my wrist to the bandwidth used to transmit the message to the servers/routers line repeaters switches to convey the message.
>
> Look at energy saved to power and cool the servers and all ancillary electronic parts. Fossil fuel is contributing to foul air and global warming. One less letter is helping to save the planet
> Me going Green and u demanding me not is not so much so cool of u
>
> idk y u r upset
If you are capable of typing such long walls of meaningless text, then you are fully capable of typing the word "would".
> Shall we consider the value of using wood in all cases to convey the message.
You look like an ass when you deliberately misspell such a simple word.
> One letter saved is conservation of energy.
...and yet you spend so much energy typing illegible gibberish, like this:
> From my wrist to the bandwidth used to transmit the message to the servers/routers line repeaters switches to convey the message.
>
> Look at energy saved to power and cool the servers and all ancillary electronic parts. Fossil fuel is contributing to foul air and global warming. One less letter is helping to save the planet
> Me going Green and u demanding me not is not so much so cool of u
>
> idk y u r upset
If you are capable of typing such long walls of meaningless text, then you are fully capable of typing the word "would".
Syntax replied with this 11 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #622,601
@previous (E)I took the time to rite a wall of text so as to reply with full accuracy.
It was not meaningless text. I used science to prove my point.
So now let me give this to you from a well known riter and none of it can you deny as relevant n if that is not good nuff for you I can pull out some Shakespeare
"SPELLING"
"I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing. I have a correspondent whose letters are always a refreshment to me, there is such a breezy unfettered originality about his orthography. He always spells Kow with a large K. Now that is just as good as to spell it with a small one. It is better. It gives the imagination a broader field, a wider scope. It suggests to the mind a grand, vague, impressive new kind of a cow."
"I have had an aversion to good spelling for sixty years and more, merely for the reason that when I was a boy there was not a thing I could do creditably except spell according to the book. It was a poor and mean distinction and I early learned to disenjoy it. I suppose that this is because the ability to spell correctly is a talent, not an acquirement. There is some dignity about an acquirement, because it is a product of your own labor. It is wages earned, whereas to be able to do a thing merely by the grace of God and not by your own effort transfers the distinction to our heavenly home—where possibly it is a matter of pride and satisfaction but it leaves you naked and bankrupt."
"I never had any large respect for good spelling. That is my feeling yet. Before the spelling-book came with its arbitrary forms, men unconsciously revealed shades of their characters and also added enlightening shades of expression to what they wrote by their spelling, and so it is possible that the spelling-book has been a doubtful benevolence to us."
"...ours is a mongrel language which started with a child's vocabulary of three hundred words, and now consists of two hundred and twenty-five thousand; the whole lot, with the exception of the original and legitimate three hundred, borrowed, stolen, smouched from every unwatched language under the sun, the spelling of each individual word of the lot locating the source of the theft and preserving the memory of the revered crime."
"I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing. I have a correspondent whose letters are always a refreshment to me, there is such a breezy unfettered originality about his orthography. He always spells Kow with a large K. Now that is just as good as to spell it with a small one. It is better. It gives the imagination a broader field, a wider scope. It suggests to the mind a grand, vague, impressive new kind of a cow."
"I have had an aversion to good spelling for sixty years and more, merely for the reason that when I was a boy there was not a thing I could do creditably except spell according to the book. It was a poor and mean distinction and I early learned to disenjoy it. I suppose that this is because the ability to spell correctly is a talent, not an acquirement. There is some dignity about an acquirement, because it is a product of your own labor. It is wages earned, whereas to be able to do a thing merely by the grace of God and not by your own effort transfers the distinction to our heavenly home—where possibly it is a matter of pride and satisfaction but it leaves you naked and bankrupt."
"I never had any large respect for good spelling. That is my feeling yet. Before the spelling-book came with its arbitrary forms, men unconsciously revealed shades of their characters and also added enlightening shades of expression to what they wrote by their spelling, and so it is possible that the spelling-book has been a doubtful benevolence to us."
"...ours is a mongrel language which started with a child's vocabulary of three hundred words, and now consists of two hundred and twenty-five thousand; the whole lot, with the exception of the original and legitimate three hundred, borrowed, stolen, smouched from every unwatched language under the sun, the spelling of each individual word of the lot locating the source of the theft and preserving the memory of the revered crime."
Anonymous E replied with this 11 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #622,602
@previous (Syntax)
First off, you aren't Mark Twain. Second, Mark Twain wasn't necessarily known for misspelling words deliberately.
Stop posting that wall of text to justify your deliberate misspelling of such a simple word.
First off, you aren't Mark Twain. Second, Mark Twain wasn't necessarily known for misspelling words deliberately.
Stop posting that wall of text to justify your deliberate misspelling of such a simple word.
Syntax replied with this 11 years ago, 6 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #622,606
@previous (E)
http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=2831
And when you say
> Mark Twain wasn't necessarily known for misspelling words deliberately.
Clearly you have never read Huck Finn
http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=2831
And when you say
> Mark Twain wasn't necessarily known for misspelling words deliberately.
Clearly you have never read Huck Finn
Anonymous E replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #622,607
Syntax replied with this 11 years ago, 8 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #622,612
@previous (E)
You r sure hung up on that one word. So you might? be correct on that one word.
You should c my smile cause with web I can find words he spelled differently then wot was in common use.
For instance in Huck Finn, Twain purposely misspell the word "civilize"
You r sure hung up on that one word. So you might? be correct on that one word.
You should c my smile cause with web I can find words he spelled differently then wot was in common use.
For instance in Huck Finn, Twain purposely misspell the word "civilize"
|βʒ| Meowth joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 6 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #622,616
Anonymous E replied with this 11 years ago, 42 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #622,619
Syntax replied with this 11 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #622,622
@622,616 (|βʒ| Meowth)
LOL
Now I need to be real careful on how I tell you this butttttt
Did you no a whole lot of people just across the border from you get Satellite TV for free. Given Direct TV is on occasion a client I dare not say more other then its been a long term problem for them
I have heard through grapevine Walmart is mostly to blame for this
@previous (E)
Wot?
LOL
Now I need to be real careful on how I tell you this butttttt
Did you no a whole lot of people just across the border from you get Satellite TV for free. Given Direct TV is on occasion a client I dare not say more other then its been a long term problem for them
I have heard through grapevine Walmart is mostly to blame for this
@previous (E)
Wot?
(Edited 1 minute later.)
|βʒ| Meowth replied with this 11 years ago, 5 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #622,632
Anonymous E replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #622,633
@622,622 (Syntax)
tl;dr a lowly satellite installer who can't spell thinks he's got the "inside scoop" because he heard people can clone access cards.
You aren't special. Also:
tl;dr a lowly satellite installer who can't spell thinks he's got the "inside scoop" because he heard people can clone access cards.
You aren't special. Also:
What. W-H-A-T. What.
|βʒ| Meowth replied with this 11 years ago, 5 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #622,636
Anonymous E replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #622,637
@previous (|βʒ| Meowth)
I don't even think he's a full time employee. He's probably a contractor working off of commissions, which for his age is incredibly sad.
I don't even think he's a full time employee. He's probably a contractor working off of commissions, which for his age is incredibly sad.
