Media wankers.
in [UK Motorcycles]
|
Prev: Sat Navs for Cars
Next: Google wave invites
From: Champ on 27 Dec 2009 15:22 On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 19:11:36 +0000, Colin Irvine <look(a)bottom.of.home.page> wrote: >>OK, so in what way is the discussed usage of "Union Jack" ambiguous or >>inelegant? > >It's neither. It just doesn't feel right. A bit like passing port >anticlockwise. Hello, good evening, and welcome to the 1950s. -- Champ We declare that the splendor of the world has been enriched by a new beauty: the beauty of speed. ZX10R | Hayabusa | GPz750turbo neal at champ dot org dot uk
From: Colin Irvine on 27 Dec 2009 15:24 On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 20:22:24 +0100, Ace squeezed out the following: >On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 19:11:36 +0000, Colin Irvine ><look(a)bottom.of.home.page> wrote: > >>On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 19:26:03 +0100, Ace squeezed out the following: >> >>>On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 13:41:17 +0000, Colin Irvine >>><look(a)bottom.of.home.page> wrote: >>> >>>>On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 12:33:01 +0000, Champ squeezed out the following: > >>>>>What other authority, other than usage, can bestow 'correctness' ? >>>> >>>>Common sense, avoidance of ambiguity and elegance immediately spring >>>>to mind. >>> >>>OK, so in what way is the discussed usage of "Union Jack" ambiguous or >>>inelegant? >> >>It's neither. It just doesn't feel right. > >You mean it offends your sense of superiority? > >>A bit like passing port anticlockwise. > >Oh, you _do_ mean it offends your sense of superiority. I suppose it might, if I had one. -- Colin Irvine ZZR1400 BOF#33 BONY#34 COFF#06 BHaLC#5 http://www.colinandpat.co.uk
From: Colin Irvine on 27 Dec 2009 15:28 On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 20:22:30 +0000, Champ squeezed out the following: >On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 19:11:36 +0000, Colin Irvine ><look(a)bottom.of.home.page> wrote: > >>>OK, so in what way is the discussed usage of "Union Jack" ambiguous or >>>inelegant? >> >>It's neither. It just doesn't feel right. A bit like passing port >>anticlockwise. > >Hello, good evening, and welcome to the 1950s. Arguably my most formative decade. -- Colin Irvine ZZR1400 BOF#33 BONY#34 COFF#06 BHaLC#5 http://www.colinandpat.co.uk
From: 'Hog on 27 Dec 2009 22:17 frag <news4(a)ukrm.co.uk> wrote: > Nice catch you got there Hog :-) Which I wouldn't have seen if you hadn't...... oh never mind. It was rather, though not my intention (obviously) Naturally he is wrong about Marr but one isn't going to get into an argument with an invisible lunatic, is one. And we do know he is insane. Belief in sky fairies AND an iConversion to Judaism. It's good to have absolute certainties in this world. We don't even have to mention the obvious insanity of objecting to the execution of evil scrotes, do we ;o) Not the best example of use change all the same given how far back it dates but it is nevertheless just an obviously wrong use of a word that has become accepted. Semitic specifically. I put Anti in brackets for a reason. Jewish or Israeli would work just fine -- 'Hog
From: Andy Bonwick on 28 Dec 2009 04:47
On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 21:57:10 -0000, "'Hog" <sm911SPAM(a)hotmailCHIPS.co.uk> wrote: snip> >Currently I'm struggling with why it is suddenly unacceptable to call a >Pakistani a Paki. Now if I used the term to describe an Indian or Afghani I >could see the point. But I'm not aware of anyone ever being pulled up for >calling someone from Scotland a Scot. When you're in the mood for using this kind of logic the only person you remind me of is Des. Not a good thing. |