Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Philosopher who wrote (48217)	8/1/1999 8:51:00 PM
From: Sidney Reilly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

I dated a woman years ago who was an English major. She could really piss me off. I think I gave up writing because of her. BTW, she's still single. It must be something to do with her personality!

To: The Philosopher who wrote (48217)	8/1/1999 9:00:00 PM
From: Ish	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

<<And of course you consider yourself more intelligent than most jurors. Let's see.>> I'd say than the judges. I was on a jury where a man was beaten by a drug dealer with a chain because he wouldn't sell drugs. The charge was unlawful restraint. Two guys held the victim down and our boy beat him with a chain. The "sacred" jury room was left open and we were given instructions that we couldn't smoke, pee or have a drink of water until we reached a verdict as the judge had a party at the country club to go to. Second ballot we voted guilty on the idea that even if the defendant wasn't holding him down he was containing him as Emile Griffen did with Kid Parret when he beat him to death. The judge over ruled us. Glad I fucking wasted a day.

To: The Philosopher who wrote (48217)	8/1/1999 9:33:00 PM
From: Father Terrence	Respond to of 108807

Of course most jurors do not pull around the volumes of the OED in their little red wagon like some around here. And we all KNOW who that is!

To: The Philosopher who wrote (48217)	8/2/1999 6:03:00 PM
From: James R. Barrett	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

"They didn't like him so he must have been able to commit the crime is what transpired in there mind even though they didn't know that." "I don't know where to start in criticizing this sentence. "There mind" is singular even though there are 6 of 12 jurors. Transpire is used incorrectly. The antecedent of "that" is unclear. And that's just the grammar; the content of the sentence is nonsensical." For once Chris, I must agree with you. That was a terrible sentence. Most males don't know what the word "antecedent" means. With a few minor changes I think I can make the sentence much clearer to the inferior masses. To begin with the sentence is in dire need of a descriptive adverb followed by a subjective noun which would accent the prepositional phrase that should be substituted for the existing dangling participle which would negate the need for an antecedent and would exemplify the non-descriptive adjective which is really useless in a past tense because of the lack of a disconnected conjunction followed by a nonactive verb which subjugates the original meaning of the misunderstood sentence. Have I made myself clear? Your fellow OED reader, Jim