Am I mistaken about this?

look cockring, i made the point that an editor changing a quote to read "... jones said, who was nearly as retarded as mert," was not as big of a deal as you alarmests are attempting to make it appear.

fuck, 80 percent of editors allow "is also" instead of changing it to "also is," which is a much larger gaff in my book, but still is (note not is still) fucking trivial.

where the editor chooses to put the word said really is no big deal, but douchenozzles such as yourself want to throw your hands over your mouths and point a finger saying "oh my god," in some lame attempt to make yourselfs feel superior ... much like your original post.

my point is, so fucking what?

 

so fucking what is that the editors' version is a grammatical disaster, and no one on this thread has disputed its wrongness. Considering that, why shouldn't the kid want to have his work be cleaner grammatically? By the way, you've officially spent far more time getting your knickers in a twist about this than I have. You're pathetic, and that's not new.

 

Well, I know that wasn't directed at me, but just note that I didn't consider throwing myself off a building over this.

But the "so fucking what?" is this: It's fucking wrong. If you think putting "said" between the subject of the clause and the clause is less serious than the difference between "is also" and "also is," then I guess I'll give up at that point.

"Jones said, who scored 14 points," is fucking abominable, wrong, black-and-whitely so, construction. It's not a matter of where the editor placed the word "said." It's not discretionary, any more then spelling the animal as "kat" is.

This guy wanted to know. He was right, and got his answer, before this devolved into this bizarre exchange.

 

Don't out 21!

 

still with the hand over the mouth because of the placement of the word said, eh, cockring? gonna ask for the death penalty for people who drive 75 in a 70 zone?

we have people in the industry who make up quotes and you, you little fucking alarmist, call this a "disaster?" dumbass.

 

Mert;

You don't know me from Adam, my friend, but allow me one quick observation...

You've induced a fellow adult male to call you "cockring." Twice.

By my books, I think that means you've won.

Carry on.

 

I find it strange that my somewhat twisted imaginary tale about Peanuts characters engaging in anal-lingus is one of the more benign posts on this thread.

 

the point is SF, is it reads like the kid already has made this an issue with his ed. now, after getting support on this board, he's going to make this a gigantic issue with his ed.

is the kid right? shit yes. is it enough for the kid to throw a reference (probably his only real reference) down the crapper simply so he can make the point? hell no.

in the big picture it's trivial.

 

I'm gonna hate myself, but it's my last word, so:

So we can't care about the big stuff AND the smaller stuff?

So if we care about grammar and syntax and construction, we don't care about making up quotes?

I see. Well, I guess some of us are just better at multi-tasking than others.

So, as kaylee said, carry on.

 

Actually, I just read it as his wanting to get the construction right, didn't read that much more into it.

 

Kaylee has a, um, soft spot for cock rings.

 

missed the already butted heads part?