Flower macros
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: How far have P&S's come?
Next: Why P&S's should do some reading before taking the plunge with real cameras
From: Peter on 3 Jun 2010 10:21 "tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message news:r35e069p9qtmiqivnqcf13ngpforhm407q(a)4ax.com... > On Wed, 02 Jun 2010 20:51:45 -0400, Robert Coe <bob(a)1776.COM> wrote: > >>On Wed, 2 Jun 2010 11:40:59 -0400, "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> >>wrote: >>: "Pete" <available.on.request(a)aserver.invalid> wrote in message >>: news:2010060215454060374-availableonrequest(a)aserverinvalid... >>: > On 2010-06-02 15:27:21 +0100, Peter said: >>: > >>: >> "Allen" <allent(a)austin.rr.com> wrote in message >>: >> news:H5idna7sVZiz-pvRnZ2dnUVZ_oudnZ2d(a)giganews.com... >>: >>> Robert Coe wrote: >>: >>> <snip> >>: >>>> >>: >>>> Can we induce Google to admit "ellipsicate" into the canon? (Pun >>: >>>> intended.) >>: >>>> >>: >>>> Bob >>: >>> >>: >>> Done! only 12 hours or so from your posting date. However, you >>should >>: >>> have checked first, as there is an older entry, from June 2005. >>: >>> >>: >>> Makes you wonder what newsgroups are doing to the English language. >>: >> >>: >> >>: >> Expandilating it? >>: > >>: > Of curse. >>: > >>: > I'm thinking of starting a thread just for humour: anecdotes, >>spoonerisms >>: > etc. I can't decided on the title or which newsgroup to put it in >>(don't >>: > say alt.test), so any thoughts would be appreciated. >>: > >>: Yeh! you are right. sometimes some of us, especially me, subcomb to >>: temptation ... > > A "subcomb" is a make-over on a US Navy vessel with an "SS" hull > number. > It could also mean a comb designed for people who are partially bald. -- Peter
From: tony cooper on 3 Jun 2010 10:54 On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 10:19:07 -0400, "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >"Robert Coe" <bob(a)1776.COM> wrote in message >news:lrud06910nmb6tng0hi6baa3e4un1vgfgv(a)4ax.com... >> On Wed, 2 Jun 2010 11:40:59 -0400, "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> >> wrote: >> : "Pete" <available.on.request(a)aserver.invalid> wrote in message >> : news:2010060215454060374-availableonrequest(a)aserverinvalid... >> : > On 2010-06-02 15:27:21 +0100, Peter said: >> : > >> : >> "Allen" <allent(a)austin.rr.com> wrote in message >> : >> news:H5idna7sVZiz-pvRnZ2dnUVZ_oudnZ2d(a)giganews.com... >> : >>> Robert Coe wrote: >> : >>> <snip> >> : >>>> >> : >>>> Can we induce Google to admit "ellipsicate" into the canon? (Pun >> : >>>> intended.) >> : >>>> >> : >>>> Bob >> : >>> >> : >>> Done! only 12 hours or so from your posting date. However, you >> should >> : >>> have checked first, as there is an older entry, from June 2005. >> : >>> >> : >>> Makes you wonder what newsgroups are doing to the English language. >> : >> >> : >> >> : >> Expandilating it? >> : > >> : > Of curse. >> : > >> : > I'm thinking of starting a thread just for humour: anecdotes, >> spoonerisms >> : > etc. I can't decided on the title or which newsgroup to put it in >> (don't >> : > say alt.test), so any thoughts would be appreciated. >> : > >> : >> : >> : Yeh! you are right. sometimes some of us, especially me, subcomb to >> : temptation ... >> >> "subcomb"??? I wonder if even Google will dare to pick that up!!! >> > > >http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=subcomb > >What am I missing? The concept that the Urban Dictionary is a compendium of terms used by our nation's marginally-literate youth...street talk, slang, and words and terms that might not be recognized by more educated people. In this case, "subcomb" is a bastardization of the proper word in that context: succumb. There's nothing wrong with using or understanding street talk. It's part of our society. However, it is wrong to use street talk in context where it is inappropriate. Had the usage been a deliberate injection of street talk in the right context, it would have been appropriate. It wasn't here. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
From: Peter on 3 Jun 2010 11:18 "tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message news:ttff06lsjkgftvfteei2l9ecb84pm60kl5(a)4ax.com... > On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 10:19:07 -0400, "Peter" > <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: > >>"Robert Coe" <bob(a)1776.COM> wrote in message >>news:lrud06910nmb6tng0hi6baa3e4un1vgfgv(a)4ax.com... >>> On Wed, 2 Jun 2010 11:40:59 -0400, "Peter" >>> <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> >>> wrote: >>> : "Pete" <available.on.request(a)aserver.invalid> wrote in message >>> : news:2010060215454060374-availableonrequest(a)aserverinvalid... >>> : > On 2010-06-02 15:27:21 +0100, Peter said: >>> : > >>> : >> "Allen" <allent(a)austin.rr.com> wrote in message >>> : >> news:H5idna7sVZiz-pvRnZ2dnUVZ_oudnZ2d(a)giganews.com... >>> : >>> Robert Coe wrote: >>> : >>> <snip> >>> : >>>> >>> : >>>> Can we induce Google to admit "ellipsicate" into the canon? (Pun >>> : >>>> intended.) >>> : >>>> >>> : >>>> Bob >>> : >>> >>> : >>> Done! only 12 hours or so from your posting date. However, you >>> should >>> : >>> have checked first, as there is an older entry, from June 2005. >>> : >>> >>> : >>> Makes you wonder what newsgroups are doing to the English >>> language. >>> : >> >>> : >> >>> : >> Expandilating it? >>> : > >>> : > Of curse. >>> : > >>> : > I'm thinking of starting a thread just for humour: anecdotes, >>> spoonerisms >>> : > etc. I can't decided on the title or which newsgroup to put it in >>> (don't >>> : > say alt.test), so any thoughts would be appreciated. >>> : > >>> : >>> : >>> : Yeh! you are right. sometimes some of us, especially me, subcomb to >>> : temptation ... >>> >>> "subcomb"??? I wonder if even Google will dare to pick that up!!! >>> >> >> >>http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=subcomb >> >>What am I missing? > > The concept that the Urban Dictionary is a compendium of terms used by > our nation's marginally-literate youth...street talk, slang, and words > and terms that might not be recognized by more educated people. > > In this case, "subcomb" is a bastardization of the proper word in that > context: succumb. > > There's nothing wrong with using or understanding street talk. It's > part of our society. However, it is wrong to use street talk in > context where it is inappropriate. Had the usage been a deliberate > injection of street talk in the right context, it would have been > appropriate. It wasn't here. > I disagree. Street talk, within bounds, is entirely appropriate not only in the in the context of the discussion, but also on any newsgroup where the primary focus is related to photography. Language continually morphs. the basis of many words in common and accepted use is street talk. I belong to a private writers monitored mailing list. grammatical rebukes in responses are expressly discouraged. Indeed, anyone who comments on grammar or spelling will be rebuked. Subsequent offences can result in expulsion from the list. -- Peter
From: tony cooper on 3 Jun 2010 14:08 On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 11:18:49 -0400, "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >"tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message >news:ttff06lsjkgftvfteei2l9ecb84pm60kl5(a)4ax.com... >> On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 10:19:07 -0400, "Peter" >> <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >> >>>"Robert Coe" <bob(a)1776.COM> wrote in message >>>news:lrud06910nmb6tng0hi6baa3e4un1vgfgv(a)4ax.com... >>>> On Wed, 2 Jun 2010 11:40:59 -0400, "Peter" >>>> <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> >>>> wrote: >>>> : "Pete" <available.on.request(a)aserver.invalid> wrote in message >>>> : news:2010060215454060374-availableonrequest(a)aserverinvalid... >>>> : > On 2010-06-02 15:27:21 +0100, Peter said: >>>> : > >>>> : >> "Allen" <allent(a)austin.rr.com> wrote in message >>>> : >> news:H5idna7sVZiz-pvRnZ2dnUVZ_oudnZ2d(a)giganews.com... >>>> : >>> Robert Coe wrote: >>>> : >>> <snip> >>>> : >>>> >>>> : >>>> Can we induce Google to admit "ellipsicate" into the canon? (Pun >>>> : >>>> intended.) >>>> : >>>> >>>> : >>>> Bob >>>> : >>> >>>> : >>> Done! only 12 hours or so from your posting date. However, you >>>> should >>>> : >>> have checked first, as there is an older entry, from June 2005. >>>> : >>> >>>> : >>> Makes you wonder what newsgroups are doing to the English >>>> language. >>>> : >> >>>> : >> >>>> : >> Expandilating it? >>>> : > >>>> : > Of curse. >>>> : > >>>> : > I'm thinking of starting a thread just for humour: anecdotes, >>>> spoonerisms >>>> : > etc. I can't decided on the title or which newsgroup to put it in >>>> (don't >>>> : > say alt.test), so any thoughts would be appreciated. >>>> : > >>>> : >>>> : >>>> : Yeh! you are right. sometimes some of us, especially me, subcomb to >>>> : temptation ... >>>> >>>> "subcomb"??? I wonder if even Google will dare to pick that up!!! >>>> >>> >>> >>>http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=subcomb >>> >>>What am I missing? >> >> The concept that the Urban Dictionary is a compendium of terms used by >> our nation's marginally-literate youth...street talk, slang, and words >> and terms that might not be recognized by more educated people. >> >> In this case, "subcomb" is a bastardization of the proper word in that >> context: succumb. >> >> There's nothing wrong with using or understanding street talk. It's >> part of our society. However, it is wrong to use street talk in >> context where it is inappropriate. Had the usage been a deliberate >> injection of street talk in the right context, it would have been >> appropriate. It wasn't here. > >I disagree. >Street talk, within bounds, is entirely appropriate not only in the in the >context of the discussion, but also on any newsgroup where the primary focus >is related to photography. Street talk is appropriate in any newsgroup, but this wasn't an injection of street talk. This was a misuse; a wrong choice. You can add some street vernacular into a sentence and it can be appropriate. That's doing it deliberately, though. You can weasel around and say it was a deliberate choice of a street version of a word, but it's obvious it wasn't. >Language continually morphs. the basis of many words in common and accepted >use is street talk. Gee whiz. I was never aware of that. I guess I missed news of that startling development in the English usage newsgroups and forums that I follow. >I belong to a private writers monitored mailing list. grammatical rebukes in >responses are expressly discouraged. Indeed, anyone who comments on grammar >or spelling will be rebuked. Subsequent offences can result in expulsion >from the list. So what? Any other organizations, mailing lists, newsgroups, clubs, or any other ties you have is of absolutely no importance or interest to me. It is of even less importance to me how you feel about comments about grammar or usage. This is an unmonitored, free-for-all newsgroup, and I'll post what I damn well please. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
From: Peter on 3 Jun 2010 17:13
"tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message news:gqqf06lsmlgb0iodscqa5i0519desbmute(a)4ax.com... > > Street talk is appropriate in any newsgroup, but this wasn't an > injection of street talk. This was a misuse; a wrong choice. In your opinion. There are other POVs. >You can > add some street vernacular into a sentence and it can be appropriate. > That's doing it deliberately, though. I appreciate your permission. > > You can weasel around and say it was a deliberate choice of a street > version of a word, but it's obvious it wasn't. To you. > >>Language continually morphs. the basis of many words in common and >>accepted >>use is street talk. > > Gee whiz. I was never aware of that. I guess I missed news of that > startling development in the English usage newsgroups and forums that > I follow. > We fully agree on your ignorance. It is surpassed by your arrogance. >>I belong to a private writers monitored mailing list. grammatical rebukes >>in >>responses are expressly discouraged. Indeed, anyone who comments on >>grammar >>or spelling will be rebuked. Subsequent offences can result in expulsion >>from the list. > > So what? Any other organizations, mailing lists, newsgroups, clubs, > or any other ties you have is of absolutely no importance or interest > to me. It is of even less importance to me how you feel about > comments about grammar or usage. This is an unmonitored, free-for-all > newsgroup, and I'll post what I damn well please. > You have certainly spent a lot of pixels on something that is "of absolutely no importance." This particular sub-thread is not the first in which you have been busy acting as the grammar police. -- Peter |