vibrators
in [Design]
|
From: Joachim Pense on 4 May 2010 14:38 Otto Bahn (read in sci.lang): > >> (My wife had a textbook in elementary school that listed Portland as the >> capital of Oregon. This was *in* Oregon, so while the teacher was quick >> to point out that the textbook was wrong, one has to wonder how many >> thousands of kids in other states used that particular textbook year >> after >> year, learning the wrong information... Try changing Wikipedia to claim >> that Portland is Oregon's capital and I'll wager it won't stay up for >> more than a day...) > > Maybe, but on any given day you can't assume it's correct. > It'll survive for maximally five minutes, probably much less. (If the English WP is only a little bit like the German one) > --oTTo-- -- My favourite # 95: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWfyNNsNzJA> My favourite # 79: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TEWQZ5tLD0>
From: Adam Funk on 4 May 2010 15:18 On 2010-05-03, David DeLaney wrote: > Mark Edwards <Mark-Edwards(a)comcast.net> wrote: >>You misspelt 'merely', 'straem' (a before e except as in dream) and 'roe' >>(if you're in a straem, you'll be wanting to collect fish eggs. Otherwise, >>this rhythm makes no sense.) > > Unless, like Alice, you're repeatedly catching crabs. Have you got a crab quadrille recipe? Or are you saying an ointment is required? -- Taken on the whole however this is a fine disc and a good example of the current pop scene attempting to break out of its vulgarisms and sometimes downright obscene derivative hogwash. (Julian Stone-Mason B.A., 1972)
From: R H Draney on 4 May 2010 17:52 Michael A. Terrell filted: > > >Otto Bahn wrote: >> >> "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote >> >> >> >>That would explain how I scored 875 on my English SAT. >> >> > >> >> > Not only can't you read, but you're a liar, too. >> >> >> >> Post proof or retract. >> >> >> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT_test >> >> Wikipedia is not a valid cite. Anyone can fake a web page. > > >Post proof or retract. If "anyone can fake a web page", it is not possible to "post proof" by your definition.... Is the vowel of "cot" the same as the one of "caught"?...post proof of your answer, but links to audio files are not acceptable.... On the other hand, if it's just Wikipedia you have a problem with, here's a page from the SAT Testing Board's own site: http://sat.collegeboard.com/scores/understanding-sat-scores Note that the first text on the page other than headers and menus reads: SAT scores are reported on a scale from 200-800 and that the second paragraph elaborates as: SAT Subject Test scores are reported on a scale from 200-800 .....r -- "Oy! A cat made of lead cannot fly." - Mark Brader declaims a basic scientific principle
From: Otto Bahn on 4 May 2010 18:21 "R H Draney" <dadoctah(a)spamcop.net> wrote >>> >> >>That would explain how I scored 875 on my English SAT. >>> >> > >>> >> > Not only can't you read, but you're a liar, too. >>> >> >>> >> Post proof or retract. >>> >> >>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT_test >>> >>> Wikipedia is not a valid cite. Anyone can fake a web page. >> >> >>Post proof or retract. > > If "anyone can fake a web page", it is not possible to "post proof" by > your > definition.... > > Is the vowel of "cot" the same as the one of "caught"?...post proof of > your > answer, but links to audio files are not acceptable.... > > On the other hand, if it's just Wikipedia you have a problem with, here's > a page > from the SAT Testing Board's own site: > > http://sat.collegeboard.com/scores/understanding-sat-scores > > Note that the first text on the page other than headers and menus reads: > > SAT scores are reported on a scale from 200-800 > > and that the second paragraph elaborates as: > > SAT Subject Test scores are reported on a scale from 200-800 They are now, anyway. I wonder if the scale change from 900 to 800 was prompted by declining test scores? --oTTo--
From: krw on 4 May 2010 18:50
On Tue, 4 May 2010 13:45:29 -0400, "Otto Bahn" <Ladybrrane(a)GroinToHell.com> wrote: >"Joel Koltner" <zapwireDASHgroups(a)yahoo.com> wrote > >>> Wikipedia is not a valid cite. Anyone can fake a web page. >> >> So any web page he cites you'll reject? Hmm... ok... >> >> Wikipedia is audited regularly and generally found to be as accurate as >> printed encyclopedias: It's not that Wikipedia doesn't have difficulty >> ensuring accuracy (vandalism, just plain poor research, etc.) -- it's >> clear that it does, and its shortcomings are obvious to most --, it's that >> printed encyclopedias were never as "scholarly"/well-researched as most >> people assumed, generally containing plenty of errors... that would >> persist for years and years, whereas at least Wikipedia tends to get fixed >> pretty quickly. > >Maybe someone should fix it to show how the SAT was scored >in 1969. The range was 200 to 800 in 1969, too, liar. >> (My wife had a textbook in elementary school that listed Portland as the >> capital of Oregon. This was *in* Oregon, so while the teacher was quick >> to point out that the textbook was wrong, one has to wonder how many >> thousands of kids in other states used that particular textbook year after >> year, learning the wrong information... Try changing Wikipedia to claim >> that Portland is Oregon's capital and I'll wager it won't stay up for more >> than a day...) > >Maybe, but on any given day you can't assume it's correct. > >--oTTo-- We *know* that you lie, so we can indeed assume *it* is correct. |