odd logon poppup

**Dead Prodigy** · 12-20-09, 04:48 PM

Originally Posted by Iggy

I wonder what this thread would look like if we translated it into "leet". Lets try an experiment:

7w0 Ð1ƒƒ3r3n7 $(h00£$ 0ƒ 7h0µ9h7 Ð34r (0r3¥. W3 4r3 1nÐ33Ð 1n 7h3 m1Ð$7 0ƒ 4 7r4n$1710n, bµ7 7h47 h4$ n07 9r4n73Ð 17 v4£1Ð17¥ ¥37. ¥3$, 17 1$ (0mm0n 4nÐ µnÐ3r$74nÐ4b£3 70 µ$3 "7h3¥" 1n 7h3 w4¥ ¥0µ 4nÐ J4$0n Ð1Ð (4nÐ 4$ Ð0 1) - bµ7 Ð0 n07 (£41m 7h47 17 4b1Ð3$ b¥ 0µr (µrr3n7 9r4mm471(4£ $74nÐ4rÐ$.

¥0µ $1r, ƒ41£ 70 m4|{3 7h3 Ð1$71n(710n b37w33n "pr0p3r" 4nÐ "$p0|{3n" 3n9£1$h. 7h3 $p0|{3n 3n9£1$h 1$ 1n (0n$74n7 m0710n, 7h1$ 1$ 7rµ3, h0w3v3r 17 4£$0 h0£Ð$ n0 v4£1Ð17¥ 1n Ð373rm1n1n9 7h3 $¥n74(71(4££¥ (0rr3(7 w4¥ 70 ƒ0rm 4 $3n73n(3. 7h1$ 1$ wh3r3 7h3 "pr0p3r" 3n9£1$h $74nÐ4rÐ$ (0m3 1n70 p£4¥ - 4nÐ 7h3$3 4r3 $0m3wh47 $£0w3r 70 µpÐ473 - ¥0µ w4n7 70 £00|{ 47 7h1n9$ $µ(h 4$ Ð1(710n4r13$, Ð0(µm3n7$ 4nÐ 3v3n $(h00£ m473r14£$.

"7h3m ƒ0£|{ Ð0n3 90n3 4nÐ 907 '1m$3£ƒ |{1££3Ð."

1'm (3r741n ¥0µ (4n µnÐ3r$74nÐ 7h3 4b0v3 $3n73n(3. 4$ (4n v1r7µ4££¥ 4££ ƒ£µ3n7 3n9£1$h $p34|{3r$, 4nÐ $µ(h $¥n74x 1$ (0mm0n 1ƒ n07 pr3v4£3n7 1n m4n¥ $0µ7h3rn p4r7$ 0ƒ 7h3 µn173Ð $7473$. 1 7h1n|{ ƒ3w w1££ 4r9µ3 h0w3v3r, 7h47 7h1$ 1$ pr0p3r 3n9£1$h.

Dear lord Iggy, how long did it take you to write that?

I used to be a Grammar Nazi. Then again, that was when I started off on a forum so small and unknown that we had to beat eachother with verbal abuse just to get a semblance of activity.

**MyNameDidntFit** · 12-21-09, 01:06 AM

Originally Posted by Konrad

Two different schools of thought dear Corey. We are indeed in the midst of a transition, but that has not granted it validity yet. Yes, it is common and understandable to use "they" in the way you and Jason did (and as do I) - but do not claim that it abides by our current grammatical standards.

The midst of a transition? Ha! Sir, even the venerable Mr Shakespeare used the pronouns that I claim to be grammatically correct. As you can see below:

Originally Posted by A Comedy of Errors

There’s not a man I meet but doth salute me
As if I were their well-acquainted friend

Surely, after being in use so long--and by such highly regarded authors as Shakespeare, Austen, Twain and many others throughout history--I find it hard to see any solid grounding to the claim that it is ungrammatical.

Originally Posted by Konrad

This is where the "proper" English standards come into play - and these are somewhat slower to update - you want to look at things such as dictionaries, documents and even school materials.

Documents? Shall I direct you to a 2008 amendment to the Canadian Criminal Code?

...if a peace officer has reasonable grounds to believe that, because of their physical condition, a person may be incapable of providing a breath sample...

Dictionaries? Merriam-Webster agrees with my opinion on this matter.

I would endeavour to cite some of my own school material had I not set fire to the majority of it only a month prior. In its place, however, I can gladly cite further quotes from literature, if you would like? No matter your answer, I shall provide a further piece anyway:

Originally Posted by The Four Sons of Aymon

Eche of theym sholde ... make theymselfe redy

Page 38, near the top.

Originally Posted by Konrad

I think few will argue however, that this is proper English.

That is because it is not. Whereas the usage of they can be traced through proper, and even admired, literature for hundreds of years. If you really wish to state that it is grammatically incorrect, I would beg that you give some form of solid reasoning that goes beyond "but I don't like it" because it appears that my argument is, indeed, far stronger than "my aunt does it".

Good day.

Originally Posted by Target Practice

What is it about you guys and calling me the wrong names on forums?

I just call you Jassie...