PDA

View Full Version : The president is also a bad astronomer!!



jfribrg
2005-Jun-07, 06:53 PM
I mean this in the negative sense. This Article (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050607/ap_on_re_us/kerry_grades) talks about how neither Kerry nor Bush were A students. The line that caught my attention was at the bottom of the article, referring to Bush:

He received one D in his four years, a 69 in astronomy

skwirlinator
2005-Jun-07, 07:02 PM
He was too caught up in Politics to be interested in stars. So I'll bet all the decisions he makes dealing with space programs are made by his advisors and he just signs off on them as advised. He obviously thinks its a waste of time...

A Thousand Pardons
2005-Jun-07, 07:12 PM
He was too caught up in Politics to be interested in stars.
I think you mispelled "partying"

So I'll bet all the decisions he makes dealing with space programs are made by his advisors and he just signs off on them as advised. He obviously thinks its a waste of time...
Well, there was the mission to Mars...I think that was all Bush

mopc
2005-Jun-07, 07:15 PM
What's the problem with non-A students? I always had low grades and I was proud of it! My teacher were retards and if I had dedicated my self to scool i would have had the time to read abou Einstein, Newton or to learn German, Swedish and Russian in high school!

jfribrg
2005-Jun-07, 07:17 PM
What's the problem with non-A students?
Nothing. Eye R won.

Sheki
2005-Jun-07, 07:26 PM
He was too caught up in Politics to be interested in stars. So I'll bet all the decisions he makes dealing with space programs are made by his advisors and he just signs off on them as advised. He obviously thinks its a waste of time...

Actually, I am impressed and encouraged to hear that he even took an astronomy class. Taking the course at least indicates a general interest (if not an aptitude) for the subject!

Sheki

A Thousand Pardons
2005-Jun-07, 07:33 PM
Actually, I am impressed and encouraged to hear that he even took an astronomy class. Taking the course at least indicates a general interest (if not an aptitude) for the subject!
Astronomy classes are often seen (and even designed) as low effort science classes, for students that need a science credit but are weak in science. In our high school, the strongest astronomy students do not take the astronomy class, they help out in it.

Demigrog
2005-Jun-07, 07:35 PM
He was too caught up in Politics to be interested in stars. So I'll bet all the decisions he makes dealing with space programs are made by his advisors and he just signs off on them as advised. He obviously thinks its a waste of time...

Actually, I am impressed and encouraged to hear that he even took an astronomy class. Taking the course at least indicates a general interest (if not an aptitude) for the subject!

Sheki

Core curriculum, maybe? Given a choice between Biology, Chemistry, Physics, and Astronomy, which do you think "seems" the easiest to a non-major? :roll:

Captain Kidd
2005-Jun-07, 07:44 PM
He was too caught up in Politics to be interested in stars. So I'll bet all the decisions he makes dealing with space programs are made by his advisors and he just signs off on them as advised. He obviously thinks its a waste of time...
There were a course I, and half the class actually, barely managed to squeak out a D in. The average was a D, it was a wash-out course mixed with a professor who counsulted on the subject to corporations and could no longer connect with students who were being introduced to the subject for the first time.

Edit: I'm not defending Bush's D. AS ATP said, likely easy science credit. I just flared at that waste of time comment.

For equal opportunity jabbing:

Kerry ... got four Ds his freshman year — in geology, two history courses and political science
Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it. -George Santayana

Of course the article writer also needs education on the use of the coma, there should be one after "history courses".

mwill
2005-Jun-07, 07:51 PM
Astronomy classes are often seen (and even designed) as low effort science classes, for students that need a science credit but are weak in science.

Totally. I took a college astronomy class while I was still in High School, hoping that I could actually learn something. (my high school astronomy class was so terrible) I did learne quite a bit, but it was the easiest college course I've ever taken. Never mentioned the word "equation". I didn't even have to try to get 105%.

Jim
2005-Jun-07, 08:25 PM
Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it. -George Santayana

Was he your history prof?

The Supreme Canuck
2005-Jun-07, 08:29 PM
Of course the article writer also needs education on the use of the coma, there should be one after "history courses".

Not really. That comma is optional. I always use it, though. :)

PatKelley
2005-Jun-07, 08:46 PM
Of course the article writer also needs education on the use of the coma, there should be one after "history courses".

Not really. That comma is optional. I always use it, though. :)

No no no- "coma" - which has many optional uses. And I did have many a coma after my history courses.

jfribrg
2005-Jun-07, 08:51 PM
I was always taught that there is no comma (optional or otherwise) following the penultimate item in a list.

Superluminal
2005-Jun-07, 09:36 PM
The story I heard on radio today was comparing Bush and Kerrys grades at Havard. Bush had one D, Kerry had three Ds.

Gillianren
2005-Jun-07, 10:12 PM
I was always taught that there is no comma (optional or otherwise) following the penultimate item in a list.

you were taught wrong, I'm afraid. it is optional, but it is grammatically correct. I always use it, mostly because I feel it is confusing not to.

[quote="Superluminal"]The story I heard on radio today was comparing Bush and Kerrys grades at Havard. Bush had one D, Kerry had three Ds.[./quote]

that would be a neat trick; Bush went to Yale. also, on which radio show did you hear this? (also, it should be Bush's and Kerry's.)

I don't consider grades an accurate sign of intelligence. (me fail English? that's unpossible!) as has been said, it depends a great deal on the class. and the student; I did, in fact, fail English--the assignments bored me, so I didn't do them. however, I read more books that semester than any four of my classmates put together and wrote poetry and short stories--and was assistant editor of the school's lit magazine that year.

jrkeller
2005-Jun-07, 10:33 PM
Another average student (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A37397-2000Mar18) was Vice President and he invented the internet. OK he "took the initiative in creating the internet"

All kidding aside, the most successful person I know, and probably one of the smartest too, never finished high school. He did eventually get his GED decades later.

As someone who did have good grades in college (OK is high school), it sure openned a lot of doors for graduate school, especially on getting fellowships and scholarships.

Trebuchet
2005-Jun-07, 11:25 PM
....

The story I heard on radio today was comparing Bush and Kerrys grades at Havard. Bush had one D, Kerry had three Ds.

that would be a neat trick; Bush went to Yale. also, on which radio show did you hear this? (also, it should be Bush's and Kerry's.)
....


They both went to Yale. So did Joe Lieberman (sp?) and Howard Dean, IIRC.

I'd personally favor a law prohibiting Yale graduates from holding public office.

Quantum_Raider
2005-Jun-08, 12:39 AM
It seems he also didn't do too well in geography either ...


"He asked me what state Wales was in. I said, 'It's its own country next to England Mr Bush.'

"If he doesn't know the rest of the countries in Europe, he could at least know what's in his own country.

News Article (http://xtramsn.co.nz/entertainment/0,,12253-4449335,00.html)

:o :lol:

Maybe the only reason Mars got the go ahead is because he thought it was in the middle east ?

Captain Kidd
2005-Jun-08, 12:45 AM
I was always taught that there is no comma (optional or otherwise) following the penultimate item in a list.

you were taught wrong, I'm afraid. it is optional, but it is grammatically correct. I always use it, mostly because I feel it is confusing not to.
I got extremely corrected one day. It was a great fight, 3 engineers and a Little Brown Handbook. I lost so bad.

It's optional, however, it's kind of like ain't (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=ain%27t), and some digging I did turned up that typesetters were thought to be to blame as they tried to cut ink usage. I think that's more hypothesis than theory.

Linky on comma usage (http://www.getitwriteonline.com/archive/021201.htm). Grr, can't find the really good sites that promted them as necessary and dropping the last one, while optional, was in truth a no-no.

Melusine
2005-Jun-08, 01:16 AM
A Thousand Pardons[/b]"][quote=skwirlinator]He was too caught up in Politics to be interested in stars.
I think you mispelled "partying"
ATP, you misspelled 'mispelled.' :wink: But you're right about the partying; Bush wasn't into politics in college; he was actually disinterested in politics or history, but he sure partied! He doesn't even like to admit that he was born in New Haven, CT--that fact was left out of his biography. Ah, well, the smart Elis don't go into politics, no matter who they are....they just surround themselves with people who didn't party (hard).

Astronomy in high school?? I never even had the opportunity! :evil: My mother did take it in college, and that was fun to go along with her to see the Milky Way. I asked why they named it after a candy bar. :roll:

EvilBob
2005-Jun-08, 01:22 AM
A Thousand Pardons[/b]][quote=skwirlinator]He was too caught up in Politics to be interested in stars.
I think you mispelled "partying"
ATP, you misspelled 'mispelled.' :wink: But you're right about the partying; Bush wasn't into politics in college; he was actually disinterested in politics or history, but he sure partied!
Melusine, you misspelled 'uninterested'. 'Disinterested' is not the same thing! :wink:

Melusine
2005-Jun-08, 01:30 AM
A Thousand Pardons[/b]][quote=skwirlinator]He was too caught up in Politics to be interested in stars.
I think you mispelled "partying"
ATP, you misspelled 'mispelled.' :wink: But you're right about the partying; Bush wasn't into politics in college; he was actually disinterested in politics or history, but he sure partied!
Melusine, you misspelled 'uninterested'. 'Disinterested' is not the same thing! :wink:

http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/images/smiles/eusa_whistle.gif

Main Entry: disinterested Pronunciation Guide
Function: adjective
1 : lacking or revealing lack of interest : INDIFFERENT, UNINTERESTED, APATHETIC, UNCONCERNED2 : not influenced by regard to personal advantage : free from selfish motive : not biased or prejudiced <a disinterested decision> <disinterested sacrifices>
synonym see INDIFFERENT

EvilBob
2005-Jun-08, 01:37 AM
[Pedant mode]
From Dictionary.com (not the best authority, I'll admit!)

Oddly enough, “not interested” is the oldest sense of the word, going back to the 17th century. This sense became outmoded in the 18th century but underwent a revival in the first quarter of the early 20th. Despite its resuscitation, this usage is widely considered an error.
[/Pedant mode]
:wink:

Melusine
2005-Jun-08, 01:41 AM
[Pedant mode]
From Dictionary.com (not the best authority, I'll admit!)

Oddly enough, “not interested” is the oldest sense of the word, going back to the 17th century. This sense became outmoded in the 18th century but underwent a revival in the first quarter of the early 20th. Despite its resuscitation, this usage is widely considered an error.
[/Pedant mode]
:wink:

Disinterested is correct, sorry to say. I don't even know what word you're quoting there, but I quoted a higher authority. :wink: Pedant x 2. :lol:

I need help with math, not words! :lol:

Hey, I'll even raise you one: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=Bush+disinterested+in+politics+ at+college

BTW, I used to misspell 'mispell' all the time; I just became self-vigilant about it. It's confusing, because there are words that only use one S, like disinterested! I also used to misspell embarrass, (as embarass), occurred (occured), and a few others. Who knows why some words just don't stick.
#-o
Edit to add link.

EvilBob
2005-Jun-08, 02:41 AM
Ok, gloves are off! Don't mess with a pedantic librarian... :D

The Oxford English Dictionary (2nd ed.) has this to say:

Uninterested...
...
3. Unconcerned, indifferent. In this sense disinterested in increasingly common in informal use, though widely regarded as incorrect.

Disinterested
1. Without interest or concern, not interested, unconcerned. (Often regarded as a loose sense)

I'm willing to admit that the line between the two is blurrier than I thought, but I'm standing by my original statement. I can find plenty of examples where the word regime is used when the speaker really means regimen. Doesn't make it the right word.
I'll take my bat and ball and go home now! :wink:

Melusine
2005-Jun-08, 05:38 AM
Ok, gloves are off! Don't mess with a pedantic librarian... :D

The Oxford English Dictionary (2nd ed.) has this to say:

Uninterested...
...
3. Unconcerned, indifferent. In this sense disinterested in increasingly common in informal use, though widely regarded as incorrect.

Disinterested
1. Without interest or concern, not interested, unconcerned. (Often regarded as a loose sense)

I'm willing to admit that the line between the two is blurrier than I thought, but I'm standing by my original statement. I can find plenty of examples where the word regime is used when the speaker really means regimen. Doesn't make it the right word.
I'll take my bat and ball and go home now! :wink:
Sorry, EvilBob, I cited the newest edition of Merriam-Webster's, I have my 1968 edition of Webster's, plus other online dictionaries, and I showed you a Google link of modern, recent usage of disinterested in major publications, and I most purposely and rightly used that word. Either one can be used, but the synonym of apathetic is how most people use it in modern usage (see the Google link and the pages of disinterested being used). You said I used it incorrectly, and I didn't. :( It breaks my heart to say this to a librarian, since I have the utmost respect for librarians, really, but you're incorrect. I can't concede here. At least you're not apathetic! :D

Here are more and more Google pages on the word itself and meanings:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=disinterested

Too, regime and regimen is not an appropriate analogy to this, because they have totally different meanings--uninterested and disinterested have a difference of nuance in meaning. The best people offer is that uninterested is being bored, disinterested is apathetic, not caring. Those are two different shades of meaning, and in the case of Bush, it was apathy, not boredom, though politics at that time may have bored him compared to partying. :D

Edit typo

EvilBob
2005-Jun-08, 05:56 AM
Many people use 'irregardless', but it's still not a word. Sorry, I'm going to stick to my guns here - the OED is the ultimate authority on the English language. I don't consider Webster's an authority on anything, to be honest!
We may have to agree to disagree here!
8)

Melusine
2005-Jun-08, 06:11 AM
Many people use 'irregardless', but it's still not a word. Sorry, I'm going to stick to my guns here - the OED is the ultimate authority on the English language. I don't consider Webster's an authority on anything, to be honest!
We may have to agree to disagree here!
8)
It is my moral duty to defend the truth of these words. :lol: I'm not going to let the one person who actually pays attention to this be misinformed. I gave tons of Google examples--there are pages on this quoting people. You used OED 2nd edition, and the OED says they have the same meanings; you are not even reading what the OED says:

Uninterested...
...
3. Unconcerned, indifferent. In this sense disinterested in increasingly common in informal use, though widely regarded as incorrect.

**My note: OED is saying that if you use disinterested in the sense above of uninterested it is incorrect. Now, is the definition of disinterested:


Disinterested
1. Without interest or concern, not interested, unconcerned. (Often regarded as a loose sense)

***Without interest. You see? Secondly, this citation doesn't even go into much depth. But you are reading what it says incorrectly, and saying they are contradicting when they're not. Disinterested, as noted elsewhere, is a neutral thing. Apathetic, not interested. I'm not sure why you are having trouble with this...I would suggest reading the 2nd Google link where these two words in comparison are discussed.

I can not let people have the wrong and incorrect impression, just as Worzel and others would not let that .99999 whatever thread go undefended. :D So, no, I can't agree to disagree, but I'll let it stand, so I can go to bed, and let others follow the links to a better understanding. I would not defend something unless I am very sure I am correct. :lol:

Edit typo. Geesh.

EvilBob
2005-Jun-08, 06:59 AM
Uninterested...
...
3. Unconcerned, indifferent. In this sense disinterested in increasingly common in informal use, though widely regarded as incorrect.

**My note: OED is saying that if you use disinterested in the sense above of uninterested it is incorrect. Now, is the definition of disinterested:


Disinterested
1. Without interest or concern, not interested, unconcerned. (Often regarded as a loose sense)

***Without interest. You see?
Yes - but regarded as loose or incorrect.
I looked through the google results - most of them have variations on the following...
from http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/disinterested.html

A bored person is uninterested. Do not confuse this word with the much rarer disinterested, which means “objective, neutral.”
From http://www.bartleby.com/64/C003/0102.html

In traditional usage, disinterested can only mean “having no stake in an outcome,” as in Since the judge stands to profit from the sale of the company, she cannot be considered a disinterested party in the dispute. But despite critical disapproval, disinterested has come to be widely used by many educated writers to mean “uninterested” or “having lost interest,” as in Since she discovered skiing, she is disinterested in her schoolwork. Oddly enough, “not interested” is the oldest sense of the word, going back to the 17th century. This sense became outmoded in the 18th century but underwent a revival in the first quarter of the early 20th. Despite its resuscitation, this usage does not have many fans on the Usage Panel. In our 1988 survey, 89 percent of the Usage Panel rejected the sentence His unwillingness to give five minutes of his time proves that he is disinterested in finding a solution to the problem. This is not a significantly different proportion from the 93 percent who disapproved of the same usage back in 1980.
(emphasis mine)
From http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000207.htm

Disinterested means "impartial" or "not taking sides." (In other words, not having a personal interest at stake.)

Uninterested means "not interested." (In other words, not showing any interest.)

Correct: A good referee should be disinterested.
(He does not take sides.)

Incorrect: He was disinterested in Jill's hobby.

Correct: He was uninterested in Jill's hobby.
(He shows no interest.)
From http://www.sparknotes.com/writing/style/topic_65.html

disinterested: neutral, unbiased
• The best judges are disinterested.
uninterested: bored, not interested
• Uninterested in his homework, Martin nodded off.
If George W. did poorly in a class because he was not interested, he was 'uninterested', not 'disinterested'. If he did poorly in a class because (for example) he knew that whatever grade he received would not count, then he would be 'disinterested'.
You will have to do better than that to show me that the wording of
Bush wasn't into politics in college; he was actually disinterested in politics or history, but he sure partied! is the correct usage of that word! [-(

Probably the most even-handed discussion of this I found...
From http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19990402


This distinction is that disinterested, in many critics' opinion, should only be used in the sense 'impartial; unbiased', while uninterested should only be used in the sense 'not interested'. (In practical terms the only "error" is the use of disinterested to mean 'not interested'; uninterested is now extremely rare in the sense 'impartial'.) While seemingly straightforward, it, like so many usage battles, is at odds with both historical development and current practice.
<snip>
In current usage, disinterested is used to mean 'impartial'--the approved sense--a majority of the time; reports of its death have been exaggerated. But the use of it to mean 'not interested' is certainly common. There are other subtleties in the use of disinterested that we don't have room to discuss; suffice it to say that disputed uses are common and show a greater range of meaning than the simple definition 'not interested' suggests. I would recommend, though, that you be aware of the depth of modern hatred of the 'not interested' sense in addition to the 'impartial' sense, and use the former with caution. (emphasis mine)

The two words originally meant the opposite, 'Disinterested' meaning 'not interested' and 'uninterested' meaning 'impartial', but this changed in the late eighteenth century. And in another hundred years, they'll probably have changed back, or they will be exact synonyms. Right now, they are not. Language is constantly changing, and I am not one of those who insists on some 'perfect version' of the language - I know that doesn't exist.

How on earth did we get onto this? :-s

Melusine
2005-Jun-08, 01:01 PM
Again, read the Google page articles.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=Bush+disinterested+in+politics+ at+college

Bush was disinterested in politics or history in college. He was apathetic and indifferent to the Vietnam War, the protests, etc. He partied, he was indifferent, didn't take any sides, though he now says he supported the Vietnam War. BTW, his mother publicly said he was "not the brightest bulb in the bunch," or something close enough to that. But the fact is, Bush never took any kind of stand in politics at that particular age while he was at Yale.

This page of Google has more about this: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=william+safire+disinterested

I would never say, "He is disinterested in seeing the Stars Wars movie." That should be uninterested. We are hardly alone in this particular word debate it appears, but it's probably boring everybody to tears, so I'll jut say I stand by my use of it, I backed it up, and I have to go to work. :lol: But I really appreciate your persistence-- :D

Donnie B.
2005-Jun-08, 06:22 PM
As a disinterested party in this debate, I confess to being uninterested.

Gillianren
2005-Jun-08, 06:36 PM
well, at least the debate moved away from politics instead of toward them, right?

don't know how much of an authority either of you consider William Safire, Melusine and EvilBob, but he's a stickler for disinterested=impartial. I'm pretty sure Strunk & White come down on that side, too. (yes, once again, I'm too lazy to go into the other room for my copy.)

I also have to agree that the OED is the ultimate standard, and that the OED is--not clearly, perhaps--coming down on the side of disinterested=impartial. however, politics is fairly unique in that to be uninterested rather tends to make you disinterested.

Melusine
2005-Jun-08, 07:50 PM
I also have to agree that the OED is the ultimate standard, and that the OED is--not clearly, perhaps--coming down on the side of disinterested=impartial. however, politics is fairly unique in that to be uninterested rather tends to make you disinterested.
Why do you think the OED is the ultimate standard? I love the OED, read Winchester's books, "The Professor and the Madman," but the OED as other well-known dictionaries compiles their words on usage. That's how the OED was started--people writing words as used in texts on scraps of paper. Now, it's committees that decide on what words go in, or how their definitions should reflect usuage, modern or archaic. I don't hold the OED as the ultimate standard, though a very high one, any more than I hold some astronomy book as the ultimate standard for astronomy or what have you.

Anyway, there are more and more pages on this: :wink:


John Hindsill wrote:
A "disinterested" party used to be a neutral party, often used as a mediator or referee. When did a disinterested party become one who had no interest in a subject or activity? Example: "I am disinterested in studying a foreign language."
In fact, disinterested meant 'not interested' before it meant anything else, and even before uninterested meant 'not interested'.

The alleged distinction between distinterested and uninterested has been one of the major usage battles of the century, perhaps peaking in the 1980s, when the survey in the second edition of Harper's Dictionary of Contemporary Usage revealed that a full 100% of its usage panel observed the distinction.

This distinction is that disinterested, in many critics' opinion, should only be used in the sense 'impartial; unbiased', while uninterested should only be used in the sense 'not interested'. (In practical terms the only "error" is the use of disinterested to mean 'not interested'; uninterested is now extremely rare in the sense 'impartial'.) While seemingly straightforward, it, like so many usage battles, is at odds with both historical development and current practice.

The first thing to observe is how radically both words have changed from their original sense. The original sense of disinterested, in the early seventeenth century, was 'not interested', and the original sense of uninterested, also in the seventeenth century, was 'impartial'. In other words, the earliest senses of both words were precisely the opposite of what they are claimed to mean today, a fact conveniently ignored by self-declared "traditionalists" who argue in favor of the distinction presented in my last paragraph.

The word disinterested developed the sense 'impartial', and the 'not interested' sense fell out of use by the late eighteenth century. Also in the late eighteenth century, uninterested developed its current use of 'not interested', and the original 'impartial' sense grew rare. This state of affairs, in place through the nineteenth century, is the one most commentators favor.

By the early twentieth century, disinterested 'not interested' started getting used again, and in the early part of the century commentators were pointing out the difference between it and uninterested. Actual criticism of that sense began by around 1950. The revival of disinterested 'not interested' seems to have been a British phenomenon, and it has been especially harshly criticized by Americans, thus proving wrong those various British commentators who blame it on U.S. usage.

In current usage, disinterested is used to mean 'impartial'--the approved sense--a majority of the time; reports of its death have been exaggerated. But the use of it to mean 'not interested' is certainly common. There are other subtleties in the use of disinterested that we don't have room to discuss; suffice it to say that disputed uses are common and show a greater range of meaning than the simple definition 'not interested' suggests. I would recommend, though, that you be aware of the depth of modern hatred of the 'not interested' sense in addition to the 'impartial' sense, and use the former with caution.
http://tinyurl.com/b55ey


Donnie B wrote:
As a disinterested party in this debate, I confess to being uninterested.

Lol! It does get boring when there's a stalemate about the debate, as with any subject. This one is still being debated out there in the linguistics world. There is a very dry essay out there about this very thing, and it bored me to tears. :lol:

EvilBob
2005-Jun-08, 10:58 PM
We are hardly alone in this particular word debate it appears, but it's probably boring everybody to tears, so I'll jut say I stand by my use of it, I backed it up, and I have to go to work. :lol: But I really appreciate your persistence-- :D
8) And I yours! I agree - we're not going to solve this one. When I said 'agree to disagree', I meant that - I'm probably not going to convince you, and you're probably not going to convince me! That's ok!
I do now have a greater understanding of the use of the word than I did before, but I stand by my original statement too.
It probably wasn't that important anyway - I knew what you meant by your statement, which is the real purpose of language in the first place!
Good talking with you! :D

Melusine
2005-Jun-09, 08:42 AM
EvilBob wrote:I do now have a greater understanding of the use of the word than I did before, but I stand by my original statement too.
Well, we definitely hijacked the thread, which may have burgeoned into something too political anyway, but I doubt ATP will ever misspell "mispell" again, lest the Language Posse arrives. :D (I'm kidding ATP)

...and I thought you were just getting on my case for those library books I never returned.... 8-[

EvilBob
2005-Jun-09, 09:19 AM
Maybe next time there's an 'attack of the word-nerds' on the BABB, we'll be fighting on the same side! 8)

...and I thought you were just getting on my case for those library books I never returned.... 8-[
I KNEW it! [-X [-(
Or, as a librarian, perhaps I should say... :-$

Melusine
2005-Jun-09, 10:07 AM
Maybe next time there's an 'attack of the word-nerds' on the BABB, we'll be fighting on the same side! 8)

...and I thought you were just getting on my case for those library books I never returned.... 8-[
I KNEW it! [-X [-(
Or, as a librarian, perhaps I should say... :-$
(Coffee posting like mad) It's true: my Catholic High School library was always deserted, no one ever went there. A lot of the books came from some seminary, but they weren't all religious books. I confess, there were these Time/Life photography books...they were under-appreciated, they needed a good home like a stray cat, no one had ever checked them out, most books were never checked out. They came home with me, and liked it so much, they pleaded not to go back there...I simply had to save them from a life of utter obscurity and loneliness. I still have them, they're safe and happy, and I dust them, too. :wink: :P

Actually, I know a woman who runs a library in Connecticut, and I confessed my sins and was pardoned since I heavily support the publishing industry (still it was wrong, I know). :wink:

A Thousand Pardons
2005-Jun-09, 07:21 PM
Well, we definitely hijacked the thread, which may have burgeoned into something too political anyway, but I doubt ATP will ever misspell "mispell" again, lest the Language Posse arrives. :D (I'm kidding ATP)
I know. :)

As if I would ever be afraid of the language police (just ask gethen)