why cant these idiots get a life??

**barney** · 9th January 2006, 03:53 PM

Originally posted by p38arover+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(p38arover)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-barney
yeah thanks for that, i was going quite well with out visiting "that" forum

Yeah, sometimes it's better to say nothing. Note how they grabbed (I assume) your signature line from that forum and used it against you.

Now I'll get you to edit yours on this forum so no one does it here:

Originally posted by barney
if a pig looses it's voice, is it disgruntled?

That reads as "if a pig slackens it is voice, is it disgruntled?" which is nonsensical

I suspect you mean "if a pig loses its voice, is it disgruntled?

Ron[/b][/quote]
thanks for that Ron, i stand corrected.

**p38arover** · 9th January 2006, 04:20 PM

Not quite, you need to remove the apostrophe out of "it's" - the apostrophe makes it a contraction of "it is".

Ron

**barney** · 9th January 2006, 06:53 PM

the apostrophe also indicates ownership as in "Matthew's post was incorrect but has now been set right thanks to Ron's guidance."
but, to be fair, i guess i should've given the "it" a capital. but, then again "it" is not being used as a proper noun so it's need for a capital is not the case.

**Ace** · 9th January 2006, 07:10 PM

I havent been there in months, but i had my say. Noddy's comments were good. LX470 says he doesnt bait his Anti Land Rover posts and claims it is idiotic, yet the comment at the end of his post required inclusion. Matt

**p38arover** · 9th January 2006, 07:35 PM

Originally posted by barney
the apostrophe also indicates ownership as in "Matthew's post was incorrect but has now been set right thanks to Ron's guidance."
but, to be fair, i guess i should've given the "it" a capital. but, then again "it" is not being used as a proper noun so it's need for a capital is not the case.

Yes, the apostrophe can indicate ownership. However, in the case of "it's", it is generally accepted that it is not used that way in "it's"

See: http://www.fred.net/kathy/its.html
http://www.fred.net/kathy/its.html
http://www.ruthvilmi.net/LangHelp/Grammar/...postrophes.html

Ron

**Ace** · 9th January 2006, 07:41 PM

Originally posted by p38arover+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(p38arover)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-barney
the apostrophe also indicates ownership as in "Matthew's post was incorrect but has now been set right thanks to Ron's guidance."
but, to be fair, i guess i should've given the "it" a capital. but, then again "it" is not being used as a proper noun so it's need for a capital is not the case.

Yes, the apostrophe can indicate ownership. However, in the case of "it's", it is generally accepted that it is not used that way in "it's"

See: http://www.fred.net/kathy/its.html
http://www.fred.net/kathy/its.html
http://www.ruthvilmi.net/LangHelp/Grammar/...postrophes.html

Ron[/b][/quote]

Ok, this discussion is more boring than the one on Overlander.

**barney** · 10th January 2006, 03:56 PM

Originally posted by p38arover+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(p38arover)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-barney
the apostrophe also indicates ownership as in "Matthew's post was incorrect but has now been set right thanks to Ron's guidance."
but, to be fair, i guess i should've given the "it" a capital. but, then again "it" is not being used as a proper noun so it's need for a capital is not the case.

Yes, the apostrophe can indicate ownership. However, in the case of "it's", it is generally accepted that it is not used that way in "it's"

See: http://www.fred.net/kathy/its.html
http://www.fred.net/kathy/its.html
http://www.ruthvilmi.net/LangHelp/Grammar/...postrophes.html

Ron[/b][/quote]
since i have not assigned a gender to the said pig, it is an "it". so, therefore i have no choice but to express the ownership of the pig's voice as "it's" voice.
as a final word on this matter, it might be generally accepted that "it's" may only be a contraction of "it is", but as my lifestyle has been somewhat non-conformist since my early school days, i would like to point out that something being "generally accepted" does not make it the rule and it wasn't accepted by me. to be perfectly honest, no-one even asked me!
let's see those O/L guys run an in depth thread like this.

**FenianEel** · 11th January 2006, 10:25 AM

How about it's a crock of #%IT

**landrovermick** · 11th January 2006, 02:28 PM

This post is exactly the reason why i stay here - i put up with enough shyte in the real world to not have to deal with mutton heads on line, its a pity because i believe there are some very good posts on other forums.

But i like it here

**sclarke** · 11th January 2006, 02:56 PM

Oh Dear.........
What have i done????

i posted a reply after the moderator removed one of my posts.
The post that was removed was not offensive or angry, it was truth.
Truth about how they cant see how a Euro 4wd can be better.
it went on to say how the forum reflects the magazine and the moderators need to cull posts when they are getting bad. i considered the fight to be getting to a stage that the Anti 4wd lobby groups would have a feild day on.

Anyhow it was pulled and i was not happy, so i posted a very short one and hence i have been banned from Overlander for Life.
Yippy................. i never have to post there again.
Why i was even there i dont know. the magazine is pox.

Anyhow. if i have offended any of my fellow LR lovers i am truely sorry.

Back to normal posts....

Thread: why cant these idiots get a life??

Thread Tools

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions