Other Resources My Cup of Joe » Will Jim PLEASE use a spellcheck? Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, the bear, DerekL, alicefoeller Reply
Show Per page
 
 
of 2
 
 
2009-03-27 9:03 AM
in reply to: #2043567

User image

Champion
7347
5000200010010010025
SRQ, FL
Subject: RE: Will Jim PLEASE use a spellcheck?
mrbbrad - 2009-03-27 10:00 AM

TriRSquared - 2009-03-26 8:04 PM Yeah Firefox has a built in checker. However if you use the rich text editor on BT it doesn't always work.

 

tru dat.

 

Turn it off and back on and it picks kicks back in.



I've also noticed if you preview the post it'll kick back on. Not sure why it doesn't play nice.


2009-03-27 9:15 AM
in reply to: #2042312

User image

Champion
6962
500010005001001001001002525
Atlanta, Ga
Subject: RE: Will Jim PLEASE use a spellcheck?
Now I'm really glad that I have no idea how to actually seperate a sentence into its parts.  Like I have no idea what an adverb, adjetive (sp), etc.  But I was always good at breaking up the subject and predicate.  Does that count?
2009-03-27 9:47 AM
in reply to: #2043615

Iron Donkey
38641
50005000500050005000500050002000100050010025
, Wisconsin
Subject: RE: Will Jim PLEASE use a spellcheck?

Marvarnett - 2009-03-27 9:15 AM Now I'm really glad that I have no idea how to actually seperate a sentence into its parts.  Like I have no idea what an adverb, adjetive (sp), etc.  But I was always good at breaking up the subject and predicate.  Does that count?

Welllll, it's time to bring back our wonderful friends from School House Rock!

Adverbs - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8kD1A7wtDo

Adjectives - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3j347DjSve0

2009-03-27 11:23 AM
in reply to: #2042312

User image

Champion
6962
500010005001001001001002525
Atlanta, Ga
Subject: RE: Will Jim PLEASE use a spellcheck?

But I'm Just a Bill!!!

That's all I know.

2009-03-27 12:21 PM
in reply to: #2043547

User image

Pro
6767
500010005001001002525
the Alabama part of Pennsylvania
Subject: RE: Will Jim PLEASE use a spellcheck?
CGunz - 2009-03-27 9:54 AM
gearboy - 2009-03-27 6:38 AM
akustix - 2009-03-26 10:24 PM
1stTimeTri - 2009-03-26 4:55 PM
TriAya - 2009-03-26 3:51 PM
Aikidoman - 2009-03-26 1:50 PM

W8t what? Me spelz gud...

Maybe Phil was talking about the other Jim.

Yes, the "other" Jim, who I'm waiting for to comment on my bad spelling.

well if we're getting into spelling, we might as well get into grammar...

The phrase above in red should be, "for whom I'm waiting to comment on my bad spelling."

 You are welcome. 

 

 

 

Actually, I believe it should read "from whom...", not "for whom". 

Gotta disagree.  The speaker is waiting for Jim.  Thus, Jim is the person for whom the speaker is waiting.

  Sorry to lurk.

I think the speaker is waiting for comments FROM Jim, not just waiting FOR Jim.  Any High School grammer teachers out there in COJ? Perhaps the correct phrasing is "from whose comments  on my bad spelling I am awaiting"?

2009-03-27 12:28 PM
in reply to: #2044222

User image

Arch-Bishop of BT
10278
50005000100100252525
Pittsburgh
Subject: RE: Will Jim PLEASE use a spellcheck?
gearboy - 2009-03-27 1:21 PM
CGunz - 2009-03-27 9:54 AM
gearboy - 2009-03-27 6:38 AM
akustix - 2009-03-26 10:24 PM
1stTimeTri - 2009-03-26 4:55 PM
TriAya - 2009-03-26 3:51 PM
Aikidoman - 2009-03-26 1:50 PM

W8t what? Me spelz gud...

Maybe Phil was talking about the other Jim.

Yes, the "other" Jim, who I'm waiting for to comment on my bad spelling.

well if we're getting into spelling, we might as well get into grammar...

The phrase above in red should be, "for whom I'm waiting to comment on my bad spelling."

You are welcome.

 

 

Actually, I believe it should read "from whom...", not "for whom".

Gotta disagree. The speaker is waiting for Jim. Thus, Jim is the person for whom the speaker is waiting.

Sorry to lurk.

I think the speaker is waiting for comments FROM Jim, not just waiting FOR Jim. Any High School grammer teachers out there in COJ? Perhaps the correct phrasing is "from whose comments on my bad spelling I am awaiting"?

given that 1TT used an infinitive... I stand by my "for whom I am waiting to comment."

 

If he had said something about awaiting comments, I would have said "from whom I am awaiting comments on my bad spelling."  And here  "waiting" would not have cut it... you need "awaiting."



2009-03-27 12:33 PM
in reply to: #2044243

User image

Champion
11989
500050001000500100100100100252525
Philly 'burbs
Subject: RE: Will Jim PLEASE use a spellcheck?
akustix - 2009-03-27 1:28 PM
gearboy - 2009-03-27 1:21 PM
CGunz - 2009-03-27 9:54 AM
gearboy - 2009-03-27 6:38 AM
akustix - 2009-03-26 10:24 PM
1stTimeTri - 2009-03-26 4:55 PM
TriAya - 2009-03-26 3:51 PM
Aikidoman - 2009-03-26 1:50 PM

W8t what? Me spelz gud...

Maybe Phil was talking about the other Jim.

Yes, the "other" Jim, who I'm waiting for to comment on my bad spelling.

well if we're getting into spelling, we might as well get into grammar...

The phrase above in red should be, "for whom I'm waiting to comment on my bad spelling."

You are welcome.

 

 

Actually, I believe it should read "from whom...", not "for whom".

Gotta disagree. The speaker is waiting for Jim. Thus, Jim is the person for whom the speaker is waiting.

Sorry to lurk.

I think the speaker is waiting for comments FROM Jim, not just waiting FOR Jim. Any High School grammer teachers out there in COJ? Perhaps the correct phrasing is "from whose comments on my bad spelling I am awaiting"?

given that 1TT used an infinitive... I stand by my "for whom I am waiting to comment."

 

If he had said something about awaiting comments, I would have said "from whom I am awaiting comments on my bad spelling."  And here  "waiting" would not have cut it... you need "awaiting."

 

Plus waiting for Jim as opposed to waiting for the comments implies the writer doesn't give a carp what Jim comments, only that Jim comments.



Edited by mrbbrad 2009-03-27 12:33 PM
2009-03-27 12:41 PM
in reply to: #2044243

User image

Pro
6767
500010005001001002525
the Alabama part of Pennsylvania
Subject: RE: Will Jim PLEASE use a spellcheck?
akustix - 2009-03-27 1:28 PM
gearboy - 2009-03-27 1:21 PM
CGunz - 2009-03-27 9:54 AM
gearboy - 2009-03-27 6:38 AM
akustix - 2009-03-26 10:24 PM
1stTimeTri - 2009-03-26 4:55 PM
TriAya - 2009-03-26 3:51 PM
Aikidoman - 2009-03-26 1:50 PM

W8t what? Me spelz gud...

Maybe Phil was talking about the other Jim.

Yes, the "other" Jim, who I'm waiting for to comment on my bad spelling.

well if we're getting into spelling, we might as well get into grammar...

The phrase above in red should be, "for whom I'm waiting to comment on my bad spelling."

You are welcome.

 

 

Actually, I believe it should read "from whom...", not "for whom".

Gotta disagree. The speaker is waiting for Jim. Thus, Jim is the person for whom the speaker is waiting.

Sorry to lurk.

I think the speaker is waiting for comments FROM Jim, not just waiting FOR Jim. Any High School grammer teachers out there in COJ? Perhaps the correct phrasing is "from whose comments on my bad spelling I am awaiting"?

given that 1TT used an infinitive... I stand by my "for whom I am waiting to comment."

 

If he had said something about awaiting comments, I would have said "from whom I am awaiting comments on my bad spelling."  And here  "waiting" would not have cut it... you need "awaiting."

Well, where is 1TT?  He needs to clarify - is he waiting for the comments or for the person? If he is waiting for the person, then I agree, he is "Jim for whom I am waiting".  But if it is the comments (action), then I stick with "from whose comments I am awaiting"

2009-03-27 12:49 PM
in reply to: #2044289

User image

Arch-Bishop of BT
10278
50005000100100252525
Pittsburgh
Subject: RE: Will Jim PLEASE use a spellcheck?
gearboy - 2009-03-27 1:41 PM
akustix - 2009-03-27 1:28 PM
gearboy - 2009-03-27 1:21 PM
CGunz - 2009-03-27 9:54 AM
gearboy - 2009-03-27 6:38 AM
akustix - 2009-03-26 10:24 PM
1stTimeTri - 2009-03-26 4:55 PM
TriAya - 2009-03-26 3:51 PM
Aikidoman - 2009-03-26 1:50 PM

W8t what? Me spelz gud...

Maybe Phil was talking about the other Jim.

Yes, the "other" Jim, who I'm waiting for to comment on my bad spelling.

well if we're getting into spelling, we might as well get into grammar...

The phrase above in red should be, "for whom I'm waiting to comment on my bad spelling."

You are welcome.

 

 

Actually, I believe it should read "from whom...", not "for whom".

Gotta disagree. The speaker is waiting for Jim. Thus, Jim is the person for whom the speaker is waiting.

Sorry to lurk.

I think the speaker is waiting for comments FROM Jim, not just waiting FOR Jim. Any High School grammer teachers out there in COJ? Perhaps the correct phrasing is "from whose comments on my bad spelling I am awaiting"?

given that 1TT used an infinitive... I stand by my "for whom I am waiting to comment."

 

If he had said something about awaiting comments, I would have said "from whom I am awaiting comments on my bad spelling." And here "waiting" would not have cut it... you need "awaiting."

Well, where is 1TT? He needs to clarify - is he waiting for the comments or for the person? If he is waiting for the person, then I agree, he is "Jim for whom I am waiting". But if it is the comments (action), then I stick with "from whose comments I am awaiting"

again... i think it was clear that he was waiting for Jim TO COMMENT... which implies that he is waiting for Jim to do something... and therefore "for whom I am waiting to comment" is correct.   

2009-03-27 1:06 PM
in reply to: #2042312

User image

Pro
3932
2000100050010010010010025
Irvine, California
Subject: RE: Will Jim PLEASE use a spellcheck?

Reminds me of a good joke...

A man is visiting Harvard but can't find the library, so he asks a passerby...  "Excuse me, can you tell me where the library is at?"

Acting shocked, the other man replies, "Sir, at Harvard we do NOT end our sentences with prepositions!"

To which the first man retorts, "Ok, then.  Can you tell me where the library is at, a$$hole?!"

2009-03-27 1:48 PM
in reply to: #2044348

User image

Pro
6767
500010005001001002525
the Alabama part of Pennsylvania
Subject: RE: Will Jim PLEASE use a spellcheck?
Tripolar - 2009-03-27 2:06 PM

Reminds me of a good joke...

A man is visiting Harvard but can't find the library, so he asks a passerby...  "Excuse me, can you tell me where the library is at?"

Acting shocked, the other man replies, "Sir, at Harvard we do NOT end our sentences with prepositions!"

To which the first man retorts, "Ok, then.  Can you tell me where the library is at, a$$hole?!"

Two doctors are in the restroom, using the urinals.  As they finish, one of them starts to walk out.  The other doctor pointedly comments "At the Univeristy of Pennsylvania Medical School, they taught us to wash our hands after urinating". To which the first doc says "Really? At Penn State, they taught us not to pee on ourselves!"



2009-03-27 1:51 PM
in reply to: #2044348

User image

Member
135
10025
Subject: RE: Will Jim PLEASE use a spellcheck?
Tripolar - 2009-03-27 1:06 PM

Reminds me of a good joke...

A man is visiting Harvard but can't find the library, so he asks a passerby...  "Excuse me, can you tell me where the library is at?"

Acting shocked, the other man replies, "Sir, at Harvard we do NOT end our sentences with prepositions!"

To which the first man retorts, "Ok, then.  Can you tell me where the library is at, a$$hole?!"

Great joke.  Grammar is fun.

2009-03-27 1:54 PM
in reply to: #2042312

Iron Donkey
38641
50005000500050005000500050002000100050010025
, Wisconsin
Subject: RE: Will Jim PLEASE use a spellcheck?
Who woulda thunk that it would become this?  I'm having a blast reading these.
2009-03-27 5:40 PM
in reply to: #2044309

User image

Giver
18426
5000500050002000100010010010010025
Subject: RE: Will Jim PLEASE use a spellcheck?
akustix - 2009-03-27 1:49 PM
gearboy - 2009-03-27 1:41 PM
akustix - 2009-03-27 1:28 PM
gearboy - 2009-03-27 1:21 PM
CGunz - 2009-03-27 9:54 AM
gearboy - 2009-03-27 6:38 AM
akustix - 2009-03-26 10:24 PM
1stTimeTri - 2009-03-26 4:55 PM
TriAya - 2009-03-26 3:51 PM
Aikidoman - 2009-03-26 1:50 PM

W8t what? Me spelz gud...

Maybe Phil was talking about the other Jim.

Yes, the "other" Jim, who I'm waiting for to comment on my bad spelling.

well if we're getting into spelling, we might as well get into grammar...

The phrase above in red should be, "for whom I'm waiting to comment on my bad spelling."

You are welcome.

 

 

Actually, I believe it should read "from whom...", not "for whom".

Gotta disagree. The speaker is waiting for Jim. Thus, Jim is the person for whom the speaker is waiting.

Sorry to lurk.

I think the speaker is waiting for comments FROM Jim, not just waiting FOR Jim. Any High School grammer teachers out there in COJ? Perhaps the correct phrasing is "from whose comments on my bad spelling I am awaiting"?

given that 1TT used an infinitive... I stand by my "for whom I am waiting to comment."

 

If he had said something about awaiting comments, I would have said "from whom I am awaiting comments on my bad spelling." And here "waiting" would not have cut it... you need "awaiting."

Well, where is 1TT? He needs to clarify - is he waiting for the comments or for the person? If he is waiting for the person, then I agree, he is "Jim for whom I am waiting". But if it is the comments (action), then I stick with "from whose comments I am awaiting"

again... i think it was clear that he was waiting for Jim TO COMMENT... which implies that he is waiting for Jim to do something... and therefore "for whom I am waiting to comment" is correct.   

I don't know what the hell you people are talking about. I responded hours ago, so no one should be waiting for anything. Or anyone. Whichever.

2009-03-27 6:15 PM
in reply to: #2044892

Iron Donkey
38641
50005000500050005000500050002000100050010025
, Wisconsin
Subject: RE: Will Jim PLEASE use a spellcheck?
run4yrlif - 2009-03-27 5:40 PM

... I don't know what the hell you people are talking about. I responded hours ago, so no one should be waiting for anything. Or anyone. Whichever.

Time to drop this thread, ya think?  FREEZE THIS THREAD!  FREEZE THIS THREAD!

2009-03-29 4:55 AM
in reply to: #2042321

Subject: RE: Will Jim PLEASE use a spellcheck?
Big Mac - 2009-03-26 4:49 PM
lisac957 - 2009-03-26 4:47 PM

Spell check is techically two words.

/ducks

 

Double HEH!

Heh....



2009-03-30 8:59 AM
in reply to: #2042312

User image

Extreme Veteran
606
500100
Subject: RE: Will Jim PLEASE use a spellcheck?
Youze guyz iz tooo funne
2009-03-30 11:49 PM
in reply to: #2042312

Subject: ...
This user's post has been ignored.
2009-03-31 6:02 AM
in reply to: #2050194

Giver
18426
5000500050002000100010010010010025
Subject: RE: Will Jim PLEASE use a spellcheck?
2018-09-21 2:42 PM
in reply to: 1stTimeTri

Buttercup
14321
5000500020002000100100100
Subject: RE: Will Jim PLEASE use a spellcheck?

The good ol' days.

FB killed BT which is a shame because it was funny as

2018-09-21 8:14 PM
in reply to: Renee

Iron Donkey
38641
50005000500050005000500050002000100050010025
, Wisconsin
Subject: RE: Will Jim PLEASE use a spellcheck?

Originally posted by Renee

The good ol' days.

FB killed BT which is a shame because it was funny as

 

Hey, Renee!  Long time!!

Yep, that was some pretty good shat right thar!

As Kenny Rogers sang when he was with The First Edition - I just dropped in ... to see what condition my condition was in.  Yeah!  Oh, yeah!



2018-10-03 1:22 PM
in reply to: 0

Buttercup
14321
5000500020002000100100100
Subject: RE: Will Jim PLEASE use a spellcheck?

testing

testing

*************************

I guess it's working again.

Sorry for the lapse in reply. I attempted to reply a few times and finally gave up. I kept getting an error message.

Anyhoo, HELLO backatcha!  How's tricks?



Edited by Renee 2018-10-03 1:24 PM
New Thread
Other Resources My Cup of Joe » Will Jim PLEASE use a spellcheck? Rss Feed  
Show Per page
 
 
of 2