Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Sexist and childish posts!!!

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Sexist and childish posts!!!

Old 26th Jun 2001, 13:12
  #61 (permalink)  
Man-on-the-fence
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

I take it this is the PPRUNE equivalent of the House of Commons talking out a debate.

Brilliant
 
Old 26th Jun 2001, 14:10
  #62 (permalink)  
Scud-U-Like
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Talking

There's far more tortuous, childish debate to be wrung out of this one.

Fobotcso, how's your head, matey? Are you sitting comfortably?

As a term meaning "a body of persons sharing a culture", "people" is a singular noun, as in "As a people, the English are known for their patience, humility, tolerance and grace". Its plural is "peoples": "the many and varied peoples of West Africa". But when used to mean "human", "people" is plural and has no corresponding singular form. Therefore, "other people's messages", as used in the context in question, is correct.





[This message has been edited by Scud-U-Like (edited 26 June 2001).]
 
Old 26th Jun 2001, 14:57
  #63 (permalink)  
X-QUORK
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Wink

Careful Scud, you could be accused of promoting racial stereotypes.
 
Old 26th Jun 2001, 15:08
  #64 (permalink)  
attackattackattack
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Scud

In the second sense the singular form is person.
 
Old 26th Jun 2001, 15:29
  #65 (permalink)  
Scud-U-Like
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Wink

attack3

I know it's difficult on a day like this, but please try to pay attention.

I said 'has no CORRESPONDING singular form'. The plural of person is persons.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
 
Old 26th Jun 2001, 15:42
  #66 (permalink)  
attackattackattack
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

 
Old 26th Jun 2001, 15:43
  #67 (permalink)  
CaptainCrunch
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Talking

Oh, dear. In Tonee's new Peoples Brittania, is this really the sort of nonsense up with which one must put?

Just a thought - would hate to be thought of as sesquipadalean.

Cap'n Crunch.

Your car, Sir.
 
Old 26th Jun 2001, 16:31
  #68 (permalink)  
kbf1
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

I notice that Scud had to edit his post, thereby indicating a less than perfect initial post. I don't suppose it was edited [I] after [I] you re-read your 11 Plus English texbook and realised you had, in fact, made a mistake? Neener, Neener, Neener [I] par chance [I]?

------------------
The path of my life is strewn with cowpats from the Devil's own Satanic HERD!
 
Old 26th Jun 2001, 16:39
  #69 (permalink)  
Thud_and_Blunder
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Wink

kbf1,

I think you'll find the UBB codes work better if you remember the forward slash in the second set of square brackets to cancel the italics

..and should it not read "perchance" instead of "par chance"?

Oh, and if racial sterotypes are getting promoted then how do I become one? Haven't had a promotion in my current org since March 1981... Should've done those exams - NOT!

Cheers
 
Old 26th Jun 2001, 17:15
  #70 (permalink)  
CaptainCrunch
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

T & B,.and should it not read "perchance" instead of "par chance"?

Should be "rather than" rather than "instead of." The latter would work with tangible objects, for example:

"Oh, Daphne! I should much prefer to have a cheeseburger shot instead of a hambuger shot this time. Then perhaps we could organise a spit roast with Charles."

"Oh, yes, my darling! I could dress up as an proctologist this time, rather than your mother as before."

"As opposed to" follows the same rules.

CC.

 
Old 26th Jun 2001, 17:28
  #71 (permalink)  
Thud_and_Blunder
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

CC,

Many thanks. I suspect that, as I've only ever been cleared up to 'smut', the reason my grammar ain't up to scratch is because I never had access to your textbooks. Any chance of borrowing one sometime? With all the pictures/instructions?
 
Old 26th Jun 2001, 18:17
  #72 (permalink)  
fobotcso
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Smile

I know I meant to say what I think and I think I said what I meant. But what I said and what I meant have not been perceived to be the same.

Sc-U-L, I never meant to take issue with your (quite correct) "people's"; but I referred it to build up to the Officers' vs Officer's point. I'm sorry that you got that impression. Both our points are correct when they are not confused with each other. "Peoples'" is commonplace and people's even moreso.

Now, carry on talking amongst yourselves; it's too hot to get excited about such matters.
 
Old 26th Jun 2001, 22:01
  #73 (permalink)  
SWB's Mate
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Thumbs up

How refreshing to see a thread that started with an offensive, uninformed post, degenerate into a squabble about grammer.
Well done boys, we showed the git. By the way, sorry to remind you what started all this. Is this the exit?
 
Old 26th Jun 2001, 22:05
  #74 (permalink)  
Whipping Boy's SATCO
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Ands up all them who wants to be a iss tutor, know wot I mean.......
 
Old 26th Jun 2001, 23:44
  #75 (permalink)  
Velvet
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Errrmmm shouldn't that be Britannia Capn C ?
You, paronymously polysyllabic - never!!!

Okay, that's the childish posts - now where's the sex?
 
Old 27th Jun 2001, 01:27
  #76 (permalink)  
SATCOS WHIPPING BOY
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Talking

Ok I see SWB's Mate has posted a reply and also Whipping Boy's SATCO, so it is now my turn.
CaptainCrunch: Surely you meant to say 'dress up as a proctologist' instead of 'dress up as an proctologist'. Unless of course you were refering to Anne with the very unfortunate surname. In which case you should have said............Oh bolloxxxx

:-) ps SWB's Mate ain't me mate and WB's SATCO ain't me SATCO ( just trying to remain anonymous OK)
 
Old 27th Jun 2001, 15:27
  #77 (permalink)  
Blue Stuff
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Wink

Wonderful. Not content with one thread debating the finer points of English grammar ("C-17 ... thankfully ... blah"), we have generated a second! Does this mean that we've run out of infantile playground humour? Surely not.
 
Old 27th Jun 2001, 16:52
  #78 (permalink)  
Gainesy
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Talking

Nil Nos me old woomera,
Ref. your post on page4
I think that "bugger" has two gs and not two @s.
 
Old 27th Jun 2001, 17:27
  #79 (permalink)  
Nil nos tremefacit
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Wink

Similar word, but local dialect dictates 2 '@'s. I think using 2 'g's gets covered in asterisks like ****.

Let's try - bugger!
 
Old 27th Jun 2001, 17:32
  #80 (permalink)  
Nil nos tremefacit
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Cool



..but how come ****, ****, **** and ****** don't appear?
 

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.