Urguycliff's obsession with bringing up ancient posts!

[GratefulFred]

Listen dude, dudess, thingy,

Digging up 3 ancient posts in their entirety from as far back as 2001 b.c. is like so counter productive. Once something slips off page one it's pretty much history. If you like the idea and wish to write some story about it and may have a question or two, just post it yourself instead of slobbering all over this sue69 who either once got you off or something.

I noticed in one of the posts there was someone named Killer Muffin, who had over 25,000 posts in just that one day!

Also there was someone mention called Sirhugs! Ever since his reincarnation as a stud horse his writting has been great but grammarically off (though some say it's because of his hooves hitting lots of keys at the same time but us in the "know" realize it's him trying to type while fucking). Still always gets a 5 as he totally deserves.

Your punishment for such transgression, is to give us some really cool idea to write a story about.

 

[mjl2010]

Listen dude, dudess, thingy,

Digging up 3 ancient posts in their entirety from as far back as 2001 b.c. is like so counter productive. Once something slips off page one it's pretty much history. If you like the idea and wish to write some story about it and may have a question or two, just post it yourself instead of slobbering all over this sue69 who either once got you off or something.

I noticed in one of the posts there was someone named Killer Muffin, who had over 25,000 posts in just that one day!

Also there was someone mention called Sirhugs! Ever since his reincarnation as a stud horse his writting has been great but grammarically off (though some say it's because of his hooves hitting lots of keys at the same time but us in the "know" realize it's him trying to type while fucking). Still always gets a 5 as he totally deserves.

Your punishment for such transgression, is to give us some really cool idea to write a story about.

We are going to have to penalize him Freddy. I think for a newbie virgin like him, he should have to read "Always Showers First". then write 20,000 words on what the story means. Otherwise we revoke his membership for life.

What do you think?

MJL

 

[cloudy]

Also there was someone mention called Sirhugs! Ever since his reincarnation as a stud horse his writting ("writing" - there is only one t in the word) has been great but grammarically (no such word. It should be "grammatically." Those who live in glass houses shouldn't sling stones) off (though some say it's because of his hooves hitting lots of keys at the same time but us in the "know" realize it's him trying to type while fucking). Still always gets a 5 as he totally deserves. (sentence fragment)

Your punishment for such transgression, is to give us some really cool idea to write a story about.

Fixed your post for you. You also need to learn comma usage. Commas are your friends.

 

[snooper]

... Digging up 3 ancient posts in their entirety from as far back as 2001 b.c. is like so counter productive. Once something slips off page one it's pretty much history. ...

I disagree. If an idea was good then, it is still good now. There is no reason why many authors should not write their versions of the same basic story.

Also there was someone mention called Sirhugs! Ever since his reincarnation as a stud horse his writting ("writing" - there is only one t in the word) has been great but grammarically (no such word. It should be "grammatically." Those who live in glass houses shouldn't sling stones) off (though some say it's because of his hooves hitting lots of keys at the same time but us in the "know" realize it's him trying to type while fucking). Still always gets a 5 as he totally deserves. (sentence fragment)

Your punishment for such transgression, is to give us some really cool idea to write a story about.

Fixed your post for you (but not completely). You also need to learn comma usage. Commas are your friends.

You missed the accusative first person plural pronoun which should have been nominative in GratefulFred's posting.

 

[cloudy]

I disagree. If an idea was good then, it is still good now. There is no reason why many authors should not write their versions of the same basic story.

You missed the accusative first person plural pronoun which should have been nominative in GratefulFred's posting.

I was tired.

 

[GratefulFred]

Fixed your post for you. You also need to learn comma usage. Commas are your friends.

Deer Kill Loud Deep Host Data Eyes Tart Did Cunt Aimed Men Knee Air Roars Inn Gram Mere. Knee How Eye Half Know Miss Takes Inn Gram Mere Ran Ewe Due Knot Half Ache Lewd.

Ankle Loud Deep, Due Knot Four Get Two Awe Ways How Ear Fear Worst,

Leave Of,

Great Full Fear Red!

Pee. Yes. Eye We Ill Ants Ear Two Snoop Ear Lay Tear...

We are going to have to penalize him Freddy. I think for a newbie virgin like him, he should have to read "Always Showers First". then write 20,000 words on what the story means. Otherwise we revoke his membership for life.

What do you think?

MJL

Excellent punishment but do you really think it's necesary for someone to have a newbee write about true romance?

 

[mjl2010]

Excellent punishment but do you really think it's necesary for someone to have a newbee write about true romance?

Abosotiveley Freddie. Straighten em out right away.

May I respectfully point out your use of the accusative first person plural pronoun which should have been nominative in your first post.

MJL

 

[Guest]

Abosotiveley Freddie. Straighten em out right away.

May I respectfully point out your use of the accusative first person plural pronoun which should have been nominative in your first post.

MJL

What did you just say????
*blondeboingy*

 

[sr71plt]

What did you just say????
*blondeboingy*

He said GF's shoe was untied.

 

[snooper]

Abosotiveley Freddie. Straighten em out right away.

May I respectfully point out your use of the accusative first person plural pronoun which should have been nominative in your first post.

MJL

What did you just say????
*blondeboingy*

He pointed out the same error as I had, 16 hours 20 minutes earlier:

[cloudy] missed the accusative first person plural pronoun which should have been nominative in GratefulFred's posting.

What could be clearer?

 

[mjl2010]

He pointed out the same error as I had, 16 hours 20 minutes earlier:
What could be clearer?

May I respectfully point out your use of the accusative first person plural pronoun which should have been nominative in your first post.

Actually, I was pointing out my own ignorance in that I while I may have had an inkling of what you were saying, I could never have used the language you did and was actually hoping you'd come back and expound on it. After Cloudy's original post here, I looked too and saw something. I could never have called it what you did. So for us neophytes, how about an explanation.

MJL

 

[GratefulFred]

Deer Kill Loud Deep Host Data Eyes Tart Did Cunt Aimed Men Knee Air Roars Inn Gram Mere. Knee How Eye Half Know Miss Takes Inn Gram Mere Ran Ewe Due Knot Half Ache Lewd.

Ankle Loud Deep, Due Knot Four Get Two Awe Ways How Ear Fear Worst,

Leave Of,

Great Full Fear Red!

Pee. Yes. Eye We Ill Ants Ear Two Snoop Ear Lay Tear...



Why is it that no one can translate this? Here's a clue? Great Full Fear Red = GratefulFred

You guys are all so hung up on grammar. Why?

 

[emap]

To annoy a certain weirdo named Fred.

Well that and Cloudy and snoopy both are VE's. It's rather in their blood.

 

[sr71plt]

You guys are all so hung up on grammar. Why?

Could it have something to do with this site supposedly being a literary site.

 

[BlackShanglan]

Also there was someone mention called Sirhugs! Ever since his reincarnation as a stud horse his writting has been great but grammarically off (though some say it's because of his hooves hitting lots of keys at the same time but us in the "know" realize it's him trying to type while fucking). Still always gets a 5 as he totally deserves.

*ears prick up*

A horse? Where? I'd be awfully gratful to know his, her, or its ID. It takes another equine to truly empathasize on some topics - hoof care, proper attire for stablehands, where to find really good alfalfa ...

 

[GratefulFred]

Grammar rules clog the brain and prevent the free flow of creative thought. Fanatic zealous individuals subscribing to the "Church of English Literature" are in a constant need to express their faith. However, they lack direction and venture down two directions in order to find greatness in Literature. The first path is to develop a method to measure the emotional impact the story transfers upon the reader. Most don't follow this path because it is a subjective analysis and the religious reviewer cannot risk giving the lone differing opinion or risk being ostracized by their peers. Thus most give up and follow a second path that does have a finite method of not finding Great Literature, but rather of striking down those who would tread upon its surface. The measurable instrument is called Grammar and its purpose is to give empowerment to the church's members.

A true test to find greatness in Literature would be to let people read stories unaware of the author to remove bias. The focus group would write down a score measuring the emotional impact they felt and the results would be averaged. At the end the stories could be cleaned for grammatical and spelling errors.

A poem comes to mind...
http://www.literotica.com/stories/showstory.php?id=155321

Those seeking an immediate response from me will be out of luck for a few days as I am heading out to the Red Sea tomorrow for a whole lotta love......
YEEEEEOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWWW......whole lotta love!

Later dudes and dudess. Keep the ideas flowin'. Freddy be out!

 

[cloudy]

Grammar rules clog the brain and prevent the free flow of creative thought. Fanatic zealous individuals subscribing to the "Church of English Literature" are in a constant need to express their faith. However, they lack direction and venture down two directions in order to find greatness in Literature. The first path is to develop a method to measure the emotional impact the story transfers upon the reader. Most don't follow this path because it is a subjective analysis and the religious reviewer cannot risk giving the lone differing opinion or risk being ostracized by their peers. Thus most give up and follow a second path that does have a finite method of not finding Great Literature, but rather of striking down those who would tread upon its surface. The measurable instrument is called Grammar and its purpose is to give empowerment to the church's members.

A true test to find greatness in Literature would be to let people read stories unaware of the author to remove bias. The focus group would write down a score measuring the emotional impact they felt and the results would be averaged. At the end the stories could be cleaned for grammatical and spelling errors.

A poem comes to mind...
http://www.literotica.com/stories/showstory.php?id=155321

Those seeking an immediate response from me will be out of luck for a few days as I am heading out to the Red Sea tomorrow for a whole lotta love......
YEEEEEOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWWW......whole lotta love!

Later dudes and dudess. Keep the ideas flowin'. Freddy be out!

If a story "needs to be cleaned of grammatical errors," I'm not reading it. Sorry.

 

[sr71plt]

"Most" don't follow the path because they are lazy and choose to be ignornant.

 

[emap]

And bad spellers.

 

[sr71plt]

Oh, was I being too subtle? Should have put quotes around "ignornant," should I?

 

[snooper]

Clarification

I could never have called it what you did. So for us neophytes, how about an explanation.

May I respectfully point out your use of the accusative first person plural pronoun which should have been nominative in your first post.

I have to make some assumptions here:

I assume you understand "May I ..."

"...respectfully..." is the way one indicates politely that the person addressed is something of a fool or an ignoramus. It is a very weak form of insult. Stronger would be "with great respect" and for the total nincompoop it would be "with all due respect".

I assume you understand "... point out your use of the ..."

"...accusative..." is the way you write a word which describes something or someone who is the target of an action. Example "She hit him": the word "him" is in the accusative form.

"...first person..." is "I" or "we", second person is "you", third person is "he", "she", "it", or "they". This reflects the inherent relative importance to the speaker of different groups of people.

"...plural..." is the way you write a word which describes there being more than one of the objects mentioned.

"...pronoun..." is the way you write a word which replaces the actual name or description of the person or object indicated. Example "She hit him": the words "she" and "him" are pronouns.

I assume you understand "...which should have been..."

"...nominative..." is the way you write a word which describes something or someone who performs an action. Example "She hit him": the word "She" is in the nominative form.

I assume you understand "...in your first post."

So the comment referred to:

... but us in the "know" realize ...

which should have been written

... but we in the "know" realize ...

Footnote: I have sr71plt and Fantasies only on my ignore list, so if they have already explained this I apologise to the reader for repetitiveness.

 

[mjl2010]

I now understand completely.

While I may not have known the correct terminology for what was written, I did know it wasn't right and that "we" should have been used in place of "us". Thanks for the grammar lesson.

Did you ever think of running a thread about this? You could pull stuff out of stories and show how it should have been; explain why and so forth. Or alternatively, let people bring you the stuff to fix. Some of us are trying to get better.

My grammar is not perfect, but it is getting better.

Thanks for the reply.

MJL

 

[snooper]

... Did you ever think of running a thread about this? ...

I don't usually have nightmares.

... You could pull stuff out of stories and show how it should have been; ...

Not without annoying a lot of authors.

As to grammar, there are many, varied standards and many national variations. Just one example: in the US people use "gotten" as part of the verb "to get"; in the UK that is considered an archaic habit and fell out of use in the last century but one. A UK English speaker is quite happy with "The prize he had got for his story" and would never dream of saying "The prize he had gotten for his story".

On the net there are a number of good grammar sites, for example:

http://www.cogs.susx.ac.uk/doc/punctuation/node30.html#SECTION00091000000000000000 and work backwards through the links to get to the grammar sections of the site.
http://www.uottawa.ca/academic/arts/writcent/hypergrammar
http://www.askoxford.com/asktheexperts/jargonbuster

BUT you will see that what one authority says is compulsory, another says is bad style, and a third (at least) implies is wrong - so take your pick, but STICK TO ONE STANDARD.
Personally, being UK English based, I use the last of the standards quoted.

 

[gsmith129]

Accusative, Objective, and Nominative.

"...accusative..." is the way you write a word which describes something or someone who is the target of an action. Example "She hit him": the word "him" is in the accusative form.

What then is the difference between accusative and objective? I thought that what you are describing was called objective form. Nominative I understand. Nominative singular personal pronouns: I, you(thee in Middle English), he and she. Nominative plural: we, you, they. Is there really a difference between objective and accusative form and if so, what is it? I'm confused.

 

[gsmith129]

Past tense vs Past perfect

"The prize he had got for his story" and would never dream of saying "The prize he had gotten for his story".

While you make a good point about there being different grammatical standards, the quote you use confuses tense. Past tense would be "The prize he got for his story" Past perfect would be "had gotten". A US speaker would be confused as to which tense you were using. There is a subtle difference in tense, and by eliminating the "gotten" form of to get we lose certain nuances that make English so expressive.