Is RCN Outsourced to India or Something??



M

Mark Hickey

Guest
"Mike Kruger" <[email protected]> wrote:

>I personally plan to throw in the towel on this and join the majority. My
>thanks to you, Bryanska, Catzz66, and others for furthering my education.


I finally dug out my 'Little, Brown Compact Handbook' - which is the
best compilation of grammar and writing rules I've ever seen (not that
you could tell that by my writing...).

The text makes it clear that the apostrophe is NEVER used to form a
plural form of a word. The top-level rule states: "Delete or replace
any apostrophe in a plural noun, a singular verb, or a possessive
personal pronoun".

Some listed examples:

Not "The Jones' ", but "The Joneses"

Not "The house is her's. It's roof leaks", but "The house is hers.
Its roof leaks".

So there you have it(s). ;-)

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame
 
N

NYC XYZ

Guest
[email protected] wrote:
>
>
> You must mean "de rigueur."


Oui, c'est ça!

> While you're quibbling about grammar, the correct usage is "As I said",
> and that's valid in all NG's.


Being that this is just usenet and NGs, colloquial speech is not
incorrect.

> Jobst Brandt
 
anonymous "foreigner" writes:

>> You must mean "de rigueur."


> Oui, c'est ça!


>> While you're quibbling about grammar, the correct usage is "As I
>> said", and that's valid in all NG's.


> Being that this is just usenet and NGs, colloquial speech is not
> incorrect.


That depends on how low you want to go with dumbing down written
communication. This is a typical excuse of the illiterate.

Jobst Brandt
 
V

Veloise

Guest
jobst.brandt wrote:

> That depends on how low you want to go with dumbing down written
> communication. This is a typical excuse of the illiterate.


Hear, hear!

"It's ok to use that spelling/punctuation/bad grammar/improper word use
'cuz I read it on the internet."

--Karen D.
 
N

NYC XYZ

Guest
[email protected] wrote:
>
>
> That depends on how low you want to go with dumbing down written
> communication. This is a typical excuse of the illiterate.
>
> Jobst Brandt



********. Or were your ancestors illiterate German peasants who didn't
know how to spell "Brand"?
 
N

NYC XYZ

Guest
[email protected] wrote:
>
>
> That depends on how low you want to go with dumbing down written
> communication. This is a typical excuse of the illiterate.
>
> Jobst Brandt



********. Or were your ancestors illiterate German peasants who didn't
know how to spell "Brand"?
 
E

Edward Dolan

Guest
"NYC XYZ" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Mike Rice wrote:
>>
>>
>> Top-posting may look better to you but can be more difficult for the
>> reader to follow. Top -posting forces one to scroll past your response
>> and search the quoted text to be reminded of the issue you are
>> addressing.

>
> I don't even think of it as an inconvenience. If one walked into the
> middle of a conversation, it's up to oneself to put two and two
> together to get up to speed on things if one is really interested.
> Likewise, skimming a thread to follow its course up until the present
> moment isn't too much to ask of oneself, given one's curiosity. Me
> myself, I typically start at the beginning anyway, with the original
> post.


NYC, no one else will do what you do. Trust me on this. Hells Bells, I won't
even do it. Most Usenet messages simply do not repay any research or
trouble. Fully 90% of all posts are done by idiots for idiots. We all have
very short attention spans and are usually in one hell of a sour mood
besides. So do it right for Christ's sakes!

>> Even worse, many top-posters omit any quoted text, leaving the reader
>> to wonder what in the world they are referring.

>
> Why sit in the dark and complain about it? Turn on the light -- scroll
> up to the previous post, etc.


If you do it right it makes it easy. If you do it wrong, it makes it hard
and many will not bother with you. And why the hell should they. You have
announced yourself as an idiot by not posting right. Therefore, you can go
screw yourself!

>> No neeed to keep the entire body of a long evolving thread. Judicious
>> snippage, while retaining the issue(s) at hand make for a better
>> discourse. These Usenet conventions have evolved to facilitate
>> communmication, but are more guidlines than rules.

>
> Indeed, because I think the reader should provide such "contexts"
> themselves. It's like "Letters to the Editor" -- get the back-issue if
> you're interested in what the writer's complaining about.


Just how dumb and screwed up are you anyway! This is not letters to the
editor, this is Usenet. Damn it all to hell, we are lazy and will not look
up anything - ever!

>> If, for example, one's purpose were to annoy a certian egocentric
>> poster then top-posting may be appropriate.

>
> Truly! But I don't think he's annoyed so much as amused. I suspect
> he's even rather flattered by the attention devoted to him. Ed Dolan
> needs his own talk show! "Next up...'Catholic Recumbent Cyclists and
> The Sexual Politics of Gourmet Dining!'"


No, I want you to post as Indiana Mike and I say you should. You show
rudeness and contempt for the reader and the entire group by not doing it
the right way.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
 
E

Edward Dolan

Guest
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
anonymous "foreigner" writes:

>> You must mean "de rigueur."


> Oui, c'est ça!


>> While you're quibbling about grammar, the correct usage is "As I
>> said", and that's valid in all NG's.


> Being that this is just usenet and NGs, colloquial speech is not
> incorrect.


That depends on how low you want to go with dumbing down written
communication. This is a typical excuse of the illiterate.

Jobst Brandt

NYC is anything but illiterate, but he can be a bit sloppy from time to
time. So can you by the way. There is common colloquial speech and then
there is that which is not common. We should not ever be using that which is
not common, but it is absurd to confuse Usenet with anything we would ever
write for publication. Even I, the Great Ed Dolan, have been known to be not
always 100% correct, so that let's everyone else off the hook, even Jobst (I
wonder how the hell you pronounce a name like that).

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
 
C

catzz66

Guest
[email protected] wrote:
>
> in reply to:
>>Being that this is just usenet and NGs, colloquial speech is not
>>incorrect.

>
>
> That depends on how low you want to go with dumbing down written
> communication. This is a typical excuse of the illiterate.
>


Normally, I would consider grammar and spelling off limits here, but
someone asked. Also, I am not a big fan of any certain practice
becoming grammatically "legal" just because a lot of people do it.
 
E

Edward Dolan

Guest
"Mark Hickey" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> "Mike Kruger" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>I personally plan to throw in the towel on this and join the majority.
>>My
>>thanks to you, Bryanska, Catzz66, and others for furthering my education.

>
> I finally dug out my 'Little, Brown Compact Handbook' - which is the
> best compilation of grammar and writing rules I've ever seen (not that
> you could tell that by my writing...).
>
> The text makes it clear that the apostrophe is NEVER used to form a
> plural form of a word. The top-level rule states: "Delete or replace
> any apostrophe in a plural noun, a singular verb, or a possessive
> personal pronoun".
>
> Some listed examples:
>
> Not "The Jones' ", but "The Joneses"
>
> Not "The house is her's. It's roof leaks", but "The house is hers.
> Its roof leaks".
>
> So there you have it(s). ;-)


Not quite! Why? Because it just doesn't look right.

Here is how I would write it based on how it should look:

The house is hers. Its' roof leaks.

It's stands for it is. Its as the possessive has to be its' because without
the apostrophe it just plain looks goofy. Also, I like Jones' or Jones's
much better than I like Joneses. I think the latter is awkward, looks goofy
and is likely wrong.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
 
B

bryanska

Guest

> Not quite! Why? Because it just doesn't look right.
>
> Here is how I would write it based on how it should look:
>
> The house is hers. Its' roof leaks.
>
> It's stands for it is. Its as the possessive has to be its' because without
> the apostrophe it just plain looks goofy.


I regret even opening this topic again...

Ed, that's also incorrect. Sorry dude.
 
E

Edward Dolan

Guest
"bryanska" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]

Edward Dolan wrote:

>> Not quite! Why? Because it just doesn't look right.
>>
>> Here is how I would write it based on how it should look:
>>
>> The house is hers. Its' roof leaks.
>>
>> It's stands for it is. Its as the possessive has to be its' because
>> without
>> the apostrophe it just plain looks goofy.

>
> I regret even opening this topic again...
>
> Ed, that's also incorrect. Sorry dude.


The grammar books resemble the French Academy with its' attempts to codify
the French language. You can almost invariably tell whether something is
right or wrong based on just how it looks. The final arbiter in these
matters is how the elites use the language, not how the hoi-polloi use the
language.

I will be very chagrined if I am proven wrong on this extremely important
issue. I mean, the world does really hang in the balance here.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
 
B

bryanska

Guest
>I mean, the world does really hang in the balance here.

It's very important. I'm basing my entire year on the outcome of this
conversation. 2006 can be a year of great achievements for me, or it
can be a harowing descent into booze and pills. Please be careful with
that apostrophe.
 

Similar threads

M
Replies
4
Views
1K
T