Don't forget complaining, the other half of the equation! You and the other sixty thousand _____ enthusiasts in the world coming together to bitch and moan about obscure details related to your annoyance with ______ manufacturers' refusal to implement your brilliant plan that will fix everything and raise _____ back up to its former heights of glory, when sixty-one thousand people were on the board.
Apologies: I had to teach freshman composition for two years while working on my M.A. I have since moved on, and teach documentation technology methods to tech writers. I seem to still notice mistakes in almost everything.
To demonstrate a conjugation, you should use the active sense of the verb in nonconditional cases, rather than the passive form for each case. Let's go through the post, Mr. Grammar Nazi:
1. God is a smiter. - You aren't using "smite" as a verb, you're using it as a direct object (noun - person, place, thing, idea): the subject (God) is something: a "smiter."
2. God is about to smite Bob. - This is a conditional use, so at least your passive sense is correct; however, you shouldn't use two prepositions in a row (even if one is part of the verb "to smite"): try "God will smite Bob."
3. God is smiting Bob. - This is an action: the verb + participle makes it passive. If you're giving a conjugation lesson, conjugate the verb, don't turn it into a modifier: "God smites Bob."
4. God has smote Bob. - This is a passive use (technically, the verb consists of two words: "has smote"), which means that, again, you're not conjugating "smite." Try "God smote Bob."
5. Bob has been smitten. - This is acceptable; however, I might avoid the passive use altogether: you don't give an active agent: by whom was Bob smitten?
In the future, please remember to ensure correct use when fixating upon the errors of others. I appreciate your time, and wish you a good day, sir.
Agreed, and well stated, sir. In her original article, she anticipated the attacks/questions/loudly shouted advice for which nerds are so (deservedly?) known:
I can hear some of you now:
* "The newsgroups are where you should go for help!"
* "Website 'A' has the documentation you need!"
* "You have to read the man pages!"
* "Use 'apropos'!"
* "It takes an expert to install and configure an operating system!"
This caution, which was followed by a lengthy explanation that the article was written to address the feasibility of Linux as a viable mass-market (read: installable by idiots) operating system, was completely ignored in many of the flames that were posted. Let's hope she gets a fair shake this time.
Try teaching at the university level and then tell me again how we don't need e-mail. Let's add a clause to this as well: even if you don't use your e-mail for non-work-related crap, any e-mail address with which you contact a significant number of undergraduates will eventually become a spam magnet. Further complication: my department requires that syllabi be placed online, with all attendant contact information, including contact e-mail address.
Dreamweaver wouldn't be so popular if everyone took this sensible route. I once had to unscrew about 15 pages created by Dreamweaver and Fireworks. It took forever - each page, despite coming from the same "template" was messed up in its own unique way.
Here, I'll fix this for you:
since murder-rates are lower in the civilized world than they are in the USA, for example in Norway where I live its one homicide pro 120000 people, about 1:7th of the US rate.
How many of you people are beating your meat and salivating at the thought that "this is it, this will finally do M$ in," not realizing that you do this EVERY DAY here. Jesus, do you really think that they got this far by screwing up in the PR department as badly as you're imagining it? This isn't a response to my parent post, so no offense, mate, it's just a response in general to the idiocy I've seen up to this particular point.
Dear Sir I am Prince Abu Niffigihiffigitty-Swakabaka Shibazz of Nigeria And I Have Need Of Your Help. I Found Your Name On The Internet While Looking For An Honest Deserving Business Partner. I Must Get $180,393,282,191,482 Out Of My Country Before...
Scientologists believe humans are tainted by the remnants of aliens' souls who were dumped on Earth and blown up with nuclear bombs.
This amuses me. You're welcome.
Reading through these comments, I was beginning to wonder whether anyone babbling about the panopticon had ever read Foucault, whose treatment of the Benthamist concept is at the heart of the faculty research working paper discussed by the article. Even if you haven't, your take is very close to a significant idea debated in the work (which also deals with issues of disciplines within "knowledge" and other fun topics).
What about older bands, those whose music was more "of its time?" Music - especially pop - is essentially temporal. Some albums from years ago just don't engender the feeling, the meaning, that they did when current. Quality music, sure, but if it doesn't speak to me, why should I buy it? If, on the other hand, there happened to be two or three tracks that I enjoyed, why shouldn't I be able to purchase just those tracks? Welcome to the updated version of "greatest hits."
I agree fully. It's why I don't check these time-suckers as often as I used to: 3/4 of the comments I read I've read either verbatim or in some similar form before.
The problem here is that the Internet is close to being irreducible in it's complexity, and thus any simplifying metaphor will have to ignore a huge chunk of what's going on. Thus the need for a metaphor for explanation. There's also the fact that even among geeks, the "internet" will have wildly varying definitions, depending on the area of geekspertise.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't forget complaining, the other half of the equation! You and the other sixty thousand _____ enthusiasts in the world coming together to bitch and moan about obscure details related to your annoyance with ______ manufacturers' refusal to implement your brilliant plan that will fix everything and raise _____ back up to its former heights of glory, when sixty-one thousand people were on the board.
Apologies: I had to teach freshman composition for two years while working on my M.A. I have since moved on, and teach documentation technology methods to tech writers. I seem to still notice mistakes in almost everything.
In the future, I will be sure to employ line breaks when correcting the faults of others. My apologies. Karma's a bitch, isn't it?
To demonstrate a conjugation, you should use the active sense of the verb in nonconditional cases, rather than the passive form for each case. Let's go through the post, Mr. Grammar Nazi: 1. God is a smiter. - You aren't using "smite" as a verb, you're using it as a direct object (noun - person, place, thing, idea): the subject (God) is something: a "smiter." 2. God is about to smite Bob. - This is a conditional use, so at least your passive sense is correct; however, you shouldn't use two prepositions in a row (even if one is part of the verb "to smite"): try "God will smite Bob." 3. God is smiting Bob. - This is an action: the verb + participle makes it passive. If you're giving a conjugation lesson, conjugate the verb, don't turn it into a modifier: "God smites Bob." 4. God has smote Bob. - This is a passive use (technically, the verb consists of two words: "has smote"), which means that, again, you're not conjugating "smite." Try "God smote Bob." 5. Bob has been smitten. - This is acceptable; however, I might avoid the passive use altogether: you don't give an active agent: by whom was Bob smitten? In the future, please remember to ensure correct use when fixating upon the errors of others. I appreciate your time, and wish you a good day, sir.
Agreed, and well stated, sir. In her original article, she anticipated the attacks/questions/loudly shouted advice for which nerds are so (deservedly?) known:
This caution, which was followed by a lengthy explanation that the article was written to address the feasibility of Linux as a viable mass-market (read: installable by idiots) operating system, was completely ignored in many of the flames that were posted. Let's hope she gets a fair shake this time.
Try teaching at the university level and then tell me again how we don't need e-mail. Let's add a clause to this as well: even if you don't use your e-mail for non-work-related crap, any e-mail address with which you contact a significant number of undergraduates will eventually become a spam magnet. Further complication: my department requires that syllabi be placed online, with all attendant contact information, including contact e-mail address.
Better yet - when I wanted to register for his series of conferences initially, the links were broken or the form was fouled up.
Dreamweaver wouldn't be so popular if everyone took this sensible route. I once had to unscrew about 15 pages created by Dreamweaver and Fireworks. It took forever - each page, despite coming from the same "template" was messed up in its own unique way.
You said the key words that will make these kids rich and get the teachers fired:
"Emotional distress."
since murder-rates are lower in the civilized world than they are in the USA, for example in Norway where I live its one homicide pro 120000 people, about 1:7th of the US rate.
How many of you people are beating your meat and salivating at the thought that "this is it, this will finally do M$ in," not realizing that you do this EVERY DAY here. Jesus, do you really think that they got this far by screwing up in the PR department as badly as you're imagining it? This isn't a response to my parent post, so no offense, mate, it's just a response in general to the idiocy I've seen up to this particular point.
sad that I have to break it to you, but if you're a reader of /., you don't get laid IRL. many of us have already "come to grips" with this...
Dear Sir I am Prince Abu Niffigihiffigitty-Swakabaka Shibazz of Nigeria And I Have Need Of Your Help. I Found Your Name On The Internet While Looking For An Honest Deserving Business Partner. I Must Get $180,393,282,191,482 Out Of My Country Before ...
This amuses me. You're welcome.
Reading through these comments, I was beginning to wonder whether anyone babbling about the panopticon had ever read Foucault, whose treatment of the Benthamist concept is at the heart of the faculty research working paper discussed by the article. Even if you haven't, your take is very close to a significant idea debated in the work (which also deals with issues of disciplines within "knowledge" and other fun topics).
No. If you cannot repeat a tired, useless joke setup correctly, please spare us the attempt.
"I mistrust all systematizers and avoid them. The will to a system is a lack of integrity." - Nietzsche, Götzen-Dämmerung (1889)
What about older bands, those whose music was more "of its time?" Music - especially pop - is essentially temporal. Some albums from years ago just don't engender the feeling, the meaning, that they did when current. Quality music, sure, but if it doesn't speak to me, why should I buy it? If, on the other hand, there happened to be two or three tracks that I enjoyed, why shouldn't I be able to purchase just those tracks? Welcome to the updated version of "greatest hits."
I do. My changer is an MP3 changer, tho...
And what year of college are you in?
I agree fully. It's why I don't check these time-suckers as often as I used to: 3/4 of the comments I read I've read either verbatim or in some similar form before.
That's how we Opera users roll (after we get used to the awkward interface).
You must be new here. Welcome to /.