What's new
By:
Advanced search…
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Few Changes that Might Help

O

oldmancraigy

Coach
Messages
11,979
lingard said:
You can have a lack of something or you can be lacking in a certain area, but you can`t 'lack very strongly', since a lack of something and a strength are incompatible ideas.
And the subject of the sentence is 'a dolt like me' (meaning you).
By the way, someone with a 62 I.Q. wouldn`t be as intelligent as you obviously are.
Click to expand...

And who made you the voice of this site :p

I think you can lack very strongly?
Can't strong be used adverbially to modify lack?
Even if it can't be, Truefail still doesn't know what is being discussed here - he's too busy pretending to write papers for imaginary journals.
 
T

True EEL

Bench
Messages
4,857
lingard said:
You can have a lack of something or you can be lacking in a certain area, but you can`t 'lack very strongly', since a lack of something and a strength are incompatible ideas.
And the subject of the sentence is 'a dolt like me' (meaning you).
By the way, someone with a 62 I.Q. wouldn`t be as intelligent as you obviously are.
Click to expand...

Thanks Lingard for going through this with OMC, it wasn't going to matter what I said to him on the subject....so it seems like he may have listened to you as an impartial observer....

Nevertheless I had indeed highlighted this part of his 'sentence' twice as being in what I considered to be an obvious, blatant grammatical English error, but OMC got caught between (a)attempting to defend it to me, (b) trying to say he worded it that way deliberately to try and trap me somehow with his high-level, CIA type intelligence and (c) hedging his bets between both....and/or being confused about both options. Then there was the confusion over subject hmm

but of course in OMC's eyes....it was I who was the intellectual cripple :roll:
 
T

True EEL

Bench
Messages
4,857
oldmancraigy said:
And who made you the voice of this site :p

I think you can lack very strongly?
Can't strong be used adverbially to modify lack?
Even if it can't be, Truefail still doesn't know what is being discussed here - he's too busy pretending to write papers for imaginary journals.
Click to expand...

see, i told you, even though he has been proven wrong by an impartial observer - and not just me - he is still right and i am still wrong. i guess there is no pleasing some people ;-)

i think OMC lacks very strongly in humility ;-)
 
Parra Pride

Parra Pride

Referee
Messages
20,445
Did you know if you google search "Lack very strongly" you get a Wikipedia article about "Too Black, Too Strong"?

#TheMoreYouKnow
 
O

oldmancraigy

Coach
Messages
11,979
True EEL said:
see, i told you, even though he has been proven wrong by an impartial observer - and not just me - he is still right and i am still wrong. i guess there is no pleasing some people ;-)

i think OMC lacks very strongly in humility ;-)
Click to expand...

Erm what?

All I originally said was "do you know what is wrong with the sentence" since you claimed you did.

Then I suggested it was a perfectly fine sentence, demonstrating the grammatical constructs.

Lingard offered an opinion (I made a joke about him being the voice - situational humour from another thread) - I merely asked him if he was sure, pointing out that there may well be just usage for that construct.

Let's not forget that you (TE) are criticising the grammar of others, and in the post you criticise, you fail several grammatical constructs of your own. This is not only hypocritical, but the work of a fool. Then you go on some parade about how intelligent you are (still pretending you own a doctorate and write for journals of some kind :lol:) - when exposed you run off and sulk - never answering questions [because you don't know the answers?] and come charging back when someone else gives you a sniff.
I don't claim to use perfect grammar in all my posts - it often happens intrinsically, but not by design.

I'm very glad that this thread has degenerated into grammatical argumentation - to debate anything football related with you is a waste of everyone's time. I'd promise to fill every thread you start with unintelligible garbage, but you do a wonderful job of that by yourself!

Bottom line: I never claimed to be using the kings own english in my original post. You queried whether it made sense? It clearly follows grammatical rules very soundly and colloquially is a wonderfully clear sentence.
If you had half the brains you pretended you had you would've either apologised and given up (if you were nice) or just given up (if you were smart). Or perhaps you could keep digging yourself further into foolsland.

You have no idea TrueEel. You're now trying to piggyback off the brains of someone far brighter than yourself (being lingard), and even that is failing you.


Apologies for using several big words TE - you can google them.
 
O

oldmancraigy

Coach
Messages
11,979
True EEL said:
Thanks Lingard for going through this with OMC, it wasn't going to matter what I said to him on the subject....so it seems like he may have listened to you as an impartial observer....

Nevertheless I had indeed highlighted this part of his 'sentence' twice as being in what I considered to be an obvious, blatant grammatical English error, but OMC got caught between (a)attempting to defend it to me, (b) trying to say he worded it that way deliberately to try and trap me somehow with his high-level, CIA type intelligence and (c) hedging his bets between both....and/or being confused about both options. Then there was the confusion over subject hmm

but of course in OMC's eyes....it was I who was the intellectual cripple :roll:
Click to expand...

You don't make sense.

I put a confusing sentence in there because I know you're not smart and can't handle more than 2 clauses in a sentence construct.
I don't claim to have CIA level intelligence - I claimed a 62. That's genius level intelligence (higher than you though).

I didn't originally try and defend it - just queried whether you knew what was wrong with it (you didn't).

I think it worked fine in this colloquial setting - could even be perfect English (if I ever wrote an essay I wouldn't use that phrase - but the basic rules used in the clause are fine)
 
T

True EEL

Bench
Messages
4,857
OMC - you realise that by talking a lot and using phrases like sentence construct, etc doesn't actually make you seem like you know what you are talking about, right??

As I said, I bolded the part of your original post (way back when) that I thought was the most incorrect lacks very strongly twice. If you could not determine that was the piece I was pointing to as an error then there is no helping you. I'm not sure how many more times I can point that out to you. It was HORRIFIC English and sentence construction and YOU tried to defend it, even to Lingard and you are still now trying to defend it now; even though you are claiming that you were joking to Lingard and that you were using it in a colloquial setting - oh man, come on!?!?!? Some of the other clap-trap in these latest posts is almost worse mind you....

Also, you clearly have an IQ greater than 62, but I don't really care how smart you think you are, or quite frankly how smart you think I am.
However, since you brought it up (not sure why), although mentioning the doctorate was regrettable for the flack I have copped, its not for show pal - that is something about me you can take to the bank.

Now. Can we just stop and move on, because the more you attempt to say, the less I think of you in general. We are both Parramatta supporters, let's just leave it at that ok???
 
Last edited:
O

oldmancraigy

Coach
Messages
11,979
True EEL said:
OMC - you realise that by talking a lot and using phrases like sentence construct, etc doesn't actually make you seem like you know what you are talking about, right??

As I said, I bolded the part of your original post (way back when) that I thought was the most incorrect lacks very strongly twice. If you could not determine that was the piece I was pointing to as an error then there is no helping you. I'm not sure how many more times I can point that out to you. It was HORRIFIC English and sentence construction and YOU tried to defend it, even to Lingard and you are still now trying to defend it now; even though you are claiming that you were joking to Lingard and that you were using it in a colloquial setting - oh man, come on!?!?!? Some of the other clap-trap in these latest posts is almost worse mind you....

Also, you clearly have an IQ greater than 62, but I don't really care how smart you think you are, or quite frankly how smart you think I am.
However, since you brought it up (not sure why), although mentioning the doctorate was regrettable for the flack I have copped, its not for show pal - that is something about me you can take to the bank.

Now. Can we just stop and move on, because the more you attempt to say, the less I think of you in general. We are both Parramatta supporters, let's just leave it at that ok???
Click to expand...

(a) clearly I don't think you're very smart (and I don't think I'm very smart either - but obviously smarter than you. What I'm trying to point out is that there are many many people smarter than you on these boards [all smarter than me too] - but for some reason you think you're smarter than everyone else and go to great lengths to make up stories to "prove it"]

(b) when asked to actually prove it, you couldn't. You could only say something looked funny.

(c) Learn to read. I wasn't joking to Lingard. I was joking about the "voice" thing (which is what I said) - and asking if he was sure on the other point he made.

(d) I could care less what you think of me. I think you're a small man. In many ways. For some reason you try to make yourself look big on the internet by attempting to belittle others. Best of luck with that around here....

(e) So what if we're both Parra fans? If I was sitting next to at the game and we scored a great try I might give you a high 5. But when you start talking about Ben Roberts playing center I'd quickly change the topic to something else - ANYTHING ELSE just to derail the whole conversation (hmmm - grammar might be a good topic).
 
T

True EEL

Bench
Messages
4,857
oldmancraigy said:
(a) clearly I don't think you're very smart (and I don't think I'm very smart either - but obviously smarter than you. What I'm trying to point out is that there are many many people smarter than you on these boards [all smarter than me too] - but for some reason you think you're smarter than everyone else and go to great lengths to make up stories to "prove it"]

(b) when asked to actually prove it, you couldn't. You could only say something looked funny.

(c) Learn to read. I wasn't joking to Lingard. I was joking about the "voice" thing (which is what I said) - and asking if he was sure on the other point he made.

(d) I could care less what you think of me. I think you're a small man. In many ways. For some reason you try to make yourself look big on the internet by attempting to belittle others. Best of luck with that around here....

(e) So what if we're both Parra fans? If I was sitting next to at the game and we scored a great try I might give you a high 5. But when you start talking about Ben Roberts playing center I'd quickly change the topic to something else - ANYTHING ELSE just to derail the whole conversation (hmmm - grammar might be a good topic).
Click to expand...

OMC....just, just....just, STOP, shhh....
 
L

lingard

Coach
Messages
11,440
oldmancraigy said:
Erm what?

All I originally said was "do you know what is wrong with the sentence" since you claimed you did.

Then I suggested it was a perfectly fine sentence, demonstrating the grammatical constructs.

Lingard offered an opinion (I made a joke about him being the voice - situational humour from another thread) - I merely asked him if he was sure, pointing out that there may well be just usage for that construct.

Let's not forget that you (TE) are criticising the grammar of others, and in the post you criticise, you fail several grammatical constructs of your own. This is not only hypocritical, but the work of a fool. Then you go on some parade about how intelligent you are (still pretending you own a doctorate and write for journals of some kind :lol:) - when exposed you run off and sulk - never answering questions [because you don't know the answers?] and come charging back when someone else gives you a sniff.
I don't claim to use perfect grammar in all my posts - it often happens intrinsically, but not by design.

I'm very glad that this thread has degenerated into grammatical argumentation - to debate anything football related with you is a waste of everyone's time. I'd promise to fill every thread you start with unintelligible garbage, but you do a wonderful job of that by yourself!

Bottom line: I never claimed to be using the kings own english in my original post. You queried whether it made sense? It clearly follows grammatical rules very soundly and colloquially is a wonderfully clear sentence.
If you had half the brains you pretended you had you would've either apologised and given up (if you were nice) or just given up (if you were smart). Or perhaps you could keep digging yourself further into foolsland.

You have no idea TrueEel. You're now trying to piggyback off the brains of someone far brighter than yourself (being lingard), and even that is failing you.


Apologies for using several big words TE - you can google them.
Click to expand...


Who says I`m brighter than True Eel? I don`t think I am - even though I`ve recently become the voice of this forum (you don`t have to be smart for that.) But while I am the voice I might as well get it out there - Steven Kearney is the worst coach in the NRL and we should get rid of him as soon as possible. He`s the worst coach we`ve ever had. He makes Ron Hilditch and Mick Cronin look like Jack Gibson. That`s all the voice has to say for now. Goodnight.
 
O

oldmancraigy

Coach
Messages
11,979
lingard said:
Who says I`m brighter than True Eel? I don`t think I am - even though I`ve recently become the voice of this forum (you don`t have to be smart for that.) But while I am the voice I might as well get it out there - Steven Kearney is the worst coach in the NRL and we should get rid of him as soon as possible. He`s the worst coach we`ve ever had. He makes Ron Hilditch and Mick Cronin look like Jack Gibson. That`s all the voice has to say for now. Goodnight.
Click to expand...

The voice has spoken and the vindictive one concurs!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Top