Posts by Josh Addison
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Up Front: First, Come to Your Conclusion, in reply to Megan Wegan,
But see, say, I've never read Joss's Buffy comics, or anything like that.
Probably a good move. The canonical "Season 8" comics were pretty dire - they came very close to killing my love for the original series. (Helped along by the letters pages, wherein I was introduced to the words "Spuffy" and "Bangel". I don't approve.)
-
I once incurred the ire of a Snapes/Hagrid slash fiction community on Livejournal. Just saying.
-
Hard News: The witless on the pitiless, in reply to R A Hurley,
Although I have to give it up for your description as a "middle class foghorn," Russell. So evocative!
OK, now I can only think of Foghorn Leghorn. Russell, perhaps it would help your image if you were to start all posts with "Boy! Ah say, boy!" from now on...
-
OK, someone beat me to the Mitchell & Webb "working from home" link - am I too late with this one?
-
Up Front: Fairy-Tale Autopsies, in reply to Danyl Mclauchlan,
God, I would love to argue that point, since all of my comments would consist of paraphrased quotes from Batman and Robin.
That was pretty much the thrust of my argument, yeah. He basically ignored me everytime I did so and referred only to the fact that "Falling Down" was pretty OK. And "The Lost Boys" was good, in an 80s, ambient gay kind of way.
-
Just looking now, I see that I have less than one tenth of Emma's post count, depite, like her, having been on PAS since it started. Why the Lurky McLurkerson? Misanthropic apathy, mostly. You all seem like lovely people, but I just don't care enough to engage with you most of the time - this also translates into the belief that none of you really care about anything I might have to say.
I've managed to insinuate myself into/start a couple of arguments here in the past week; apologies to anyone who might have addressed my posts and then never received a reply - I buggered off out of those threads and never looked back as soon as I felt I'd said my piece. Two reasons: The first is that I'm remarkably conflict-averse in any case; the second is an online argument I had with a guy eleven years ago over the general crapness of the films of Joel Schumacher (I advanced the opinion that the crapness was considerable). Reading back over that and seeing what complete dicks we both came across as, I resolved never to get drawn into another argument again. I still have moments of weakness every now and then, but I always try to get out as quick as I can.
-
Cracker: Send in the Clowns, in reply to Emma Hart,
You can tell it's not a single bulk amount because you don't say "6000 people is".
Again, depends on context - you'd say "6000 people are standing in my front yard", but "6000 people is too many to be standing in my front yard", or indeed "6000 people isn't a lot of viewers for a TV show."
To be honest, I don't really care much, either. Yet here we are...
-
Cracker: Send in the Clowns, in reply to 3410,
You may be right, but I'm still not sure. I've seen quite a few instances of people hyper-correcting "less" to "fewer" recently - perhaps I'm over-reacting to their over-reactions...
To add fuel to the flames, a grammatical defence of the hated "10 Items or Less" supermarket signs...
-
Jumping on the grammar pedant train (Tech Writer, whaddaya gonna do?), I'm pretty sure "less than" is correct in that context. While it's usually "less" for mass nouns and "fewer" for count nouns, when you have a quantity of count nouns that's being treated as a single bulk amount, you use "less", e.g. The police recovered less than $1,500; It happened less than five years ago; The recipe calls for less than two cups of sugar.
-
Hard News: Perverse Entertainment, in reply to HORansome,
I wonder how long it will be until he turns up here.
If I recall correctly, he showed up and got himself banned in quick order very early on in PAS's history. Him and dad4justice.