SpazBadger Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 21 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said: It was a sensible and necessary comment. And I'm here to double down. What is a person even thinking when he writes "per say"? I mean, a normal person writing "per se" is thinking "Latin for 'in itself'." But I cannot even fathom what goes through the mind of someone who writes "per say". What does such a person think he is saying with that? It just boggles the mind. Anticipating the typical knee-jerk retort, I will say that of course I am aware that this is not a board about the English language. Nevertheless, using the language properly is a baseline expectation of all communities of intelligent adults. This contrasts sharply with places such as the comment sections of newspapers and YouTube, which belong to the domain of idiots. In a forum such as this, all the users are educated adults -- or, at least, we are expected to present ourselves as such. This does not mean that everything need be perfect. Simple typos or those errors which are generated by auto-correct do not detract from the topic being discussed. Also, quickly written messages will sometimes have errors of word usage that would have been caught with further editing. None of this is a big deal. But indications of grammatical ignorance such as "should of" or "have went" begin to overshadow the content of any topic. This is a big deal. And "per say" is even worse; this sort of thing constitutes a kind of pollution. Consider the fact that this board censors the S-word and the F-word. This rests on the notion that certain kinds of expression are offensive and inappropriate. I submit, however, that those venerable four-letter words are unobjectionable; and I further submit that what is truly offensive is writing which disregards things about English that we were all taught long before high school. The expectation that we ought to write like educated people should be accepted without any question here, as in any other civilised corner of the internet. And calling someone out for failing to meet this highly reasonable standard is not something for which I shall be apologising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldschoolvikings Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 20 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said: About a dozen years ago I started following English football, so I took to extensive reading of English newspapers. From this I became impressed at how aesthetically pleasing the English spelling conventions are. Soon thereafter I decided to adopt most of these conventions in tribute to my new favourite sport, and also in honour of the English rock bands and comedy performers whom I have loved since I was a child. What began as a conscious Anglophillic affectation has now come to feel natural. http://dstewartpaint.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JosiahWVU Posted March 2, 2016 Author Share Posted March 2, 2016 Sorry if my grammar in the opening post derailed this thread, I didn't mean it. Now let's get back to uniforms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clonewars2008 Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 Ottawa Senators Home: Away: Alt: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver_Star Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 On 2/27/2016 at 0:45 AM, Capt. America said: For Texas A&M... Home, away, and occasional alternate: That is why I like Texas A&M's white helmets. It goes back or traces back to their 1973 look. Plus, they were better in white helmets than that of the maroon helmets because the style of the look since it is the old throwbacks. BUT, I wish they do something about the numbers. I like the block numbers of their old look better than that crappy stylized one! Similar to how I feel about block shadow, Denver Broncos Copperplate Gothic numbers or whatever typeface they use. Then Minnesota Vikings stupid serif that swifts like the number is getting blown hard!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferdinand Cesarano Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 Phoenix Suns: pre-90s home and road. DC United: 2005, before MLS shirts were defaced by ads, and before the shirt template changed such that horizontal stripes could not go all the way across the front New York Mets: home - 1964-1977, 1993-1997, 2012-current (button-down, no drop-shadow, no racing stripe; I am making no distinction between white and cream) road - 1964-1973 (same as current design, but with varsity numbers) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hjones13 Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 Ole Miss Home Road Alternate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FroBroStudio Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 On 3/2/2016 at 3:21 PM, Ferdinand Cesarano said: Phoenix Suns: pre-90s home and road. DC United: 2005, before MLS shirts were defaced by ads, and before the shirt template changed such that horizontal stripes could not go all the way across the front New York Mets: home - 1964-1977, 1993-1997, 2012-current (button-down, no drop-shadow, no racing stripe; I am making no distinction between white and cream) road - 1964-1973 (same as current design, but with varsity numbers) I wish MLS gave the teams the option of not having sponsors. And although I'm not a new york fan, I do like the mets look without the black! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FroBroStudio Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 Florida Marlins before they started to use less of the teal around the new millennium and before the Miami Marlins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferdinand Cesarano Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 1 hour ago, cwilz305 said: I wish MLS gave the teams the option of not having sponsors. MLS teams do have that option. Colorado didn't have a shirt sponsor for a while, and their shirts looked so nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wences Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 30 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said: MLS teams do have that option. Colorado didn't have a shirt sponsor for a while, and their shirts looked so nice. Sponsor is money. And that's all about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kixbinder5 Posted March 7, 2016 Share Posted March 7, 2016 On March 1, 2016 at 11:12 PM, Ferdinand Cesarano said: It was a sensible and necessary comment. And I'm here to double down. What is a person even thinking when he writes "per say"? I mean, a normal person writing "per se" is thinking "Latin for 'in itself'." But I cannot even fathom what goes through the mind of someone who writes "per say". What does such a person think he is saying with that? It just boggles the mind. Anticipating the typical knee-jerk retort, I will say that of course I am aware that this is not a board about the English language. Nevertheless, using the language properly is a baseline expectation of all communities of intelligent adults. This contrasts sharply with places such as the comment sections of newspapers and YouTube, which belong to the domain of idiots. In a forum such as this, all the users are educated adults -- or, at least, we are expected to present ourselves as such. This does not mean that everything need be perfect. Simple typos or those errors which are generated by auto-correct do not detract from the topic being discussed. Also, quickly written messages will sometimes have errors of word usage that would have been caught with further editing. None of this is a big deal. But indications of grammatical ignorance such as "should of" or "have went" begin to overshadow the content of any topic. This is a big deal. And "per say" is even worse; this sort of thing constitutes a kind of pollution. Consider the fact that this board censors the S-word and the F-word. This rests on the notion that certain kinds of expression are offensive and inappropriate. I submit, however, that those venerable four-letter words are unobjectionable; and I further submit that what is truly offensive is writing which disregards things about English that we were all taught long before high school. The expectation that we ought to write like educated people should be accepted without any question here, as in any other civilised corner of the internet. And calling someone out for failing to meet this highly reasonable standard is not something for which I shall be apologising. Congrats, you're probably the most hated person on these boards now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crabcake Posted March 7, 2016 Share Posted March 7, 2016 On March 1, 2016 at 11:12 PM, Ferdinand Cesarano said: It was a sensible and necessary comment. And I'm here to double down. What is a person even thinking when he writes "per say"? I mean, a normal person writing "per se" is thinking "Latin for 'in itself'." But I cannot even fathom what goes through the mind of someone who writes "per say". What does such a person think he is saying with that? It just boggles the mind. Anticipating the typical knee-jerk retort, I will say that of course I am aware that this is not a board about the English language. Nevertheless, using the language properly is a baseline expectation of all communities of intelligent adults. This contrasts sharply with places such as the comment sections of newspapers and YouTube, which belong to the domain of idiots. In a forum such as this, all the users are educated adults -- or, at least, we are expected to present ourselves as such. This does not mean that everything need be perfect. Simple typos or those errors which are generated by auto-correct do not detract from the topic being discussed. Also, quickly written messages will sometimes have errors of word usage that would have been caught with further editing. None of this is a big deal. But indications of grammatical ignorance such as "should of" or "have went" begin to overshadow the content of any topic. This is a big deal. And "per say" is even worse; this sort of thing constitutes a kind of pollution. Consider the fact that this board censors the S-word and the F-word. This rests on the notion that certain kinds of expression are offensive and inappropriate. I submit, however, that those venerable four-letter words are unobjectionable; and I further submit that what is truly offensive is writing which disregards things about English that we were all taught long before high school. The expectation that we ought to write like educated people should be accepted without any question here, as in any other civilised corner of the internet. And calling someone out for failing to meet this highly reasonable standard is not something for which I shall be apologising. Can you imagine what this guy would have done if he had seen some of Tank's posts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chromatic Posted March 7, 2016 Share Posted March 7, 2016 Putting the new stick in rink on the front of course. And maybe a version of Johnny Canuck on the shoulder. Home Away Alt That would satisfy every portion of the fanbase I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chcarlson23 Posted March 7, 2016 Share Posted March 7, 2016 On 3/1/2016 at 10:12 PM, Ferdinand Cesarano said: It was a sensible and necessary comment. And I'm here to double down. What is a person even thinking when he writes "per say"? I mean, a normal person writing "per se" is thinking "Latin for 'in itself'." But I cannot even fathom what goes through the mind of someone who writes "per say". What does such a person think he is saying with that? It just boggles the mind. Anticipating the typical knee-jerk retort, I will say that of course I am aware that this is not a board about the English language. Nevertheless, using the language properly is a baseline expectation of all communities of intelligent adults. This contrasts sharply with places such as the comment sections of newspapers and YouTube, which belong to the domain of idiots. In a forum such as this, all the users are educated adults -- or, at least, we are expected to present ourselves as such. This does not mean that everything need be perfect. Simple typos or those errors which are generated by auto-correct do not detract from the topic being discussed. Also, quickly written messages will sometimes have errors of word usage that would have been caught with further editing. None of this is a big deal. But indications of grammatical ignorance such as "should of" or "have went" begin to overshadow the content of any topic. This is a big deal. And "per say" is even worse; this sort of thing constitutes a kind of pollution. Consider the fact that this board censors the S-word and the F-word. This rests on the notion that certain kinds of expression are offensive and inappropriate. I submit, however, that those venerable four-letter words are unobjectionable; and I further submit that what is truly offensive is writing which disregards things about English that we were all taught long before high school. The expectation that we ought to write like educated people should be accepted without any question here, as in any other civilised corner of the internet. And calling someone out for failing to meet this highly reasonable standard is not something for which I shall be apologising. No it's not. It's a perfectly reasonable mistake to say "per say" instead of "per se", Se sounds like say. You called his one tiny little grammatical error BS. That's what boggles my mind. It's not like you weren't able to understand what he was saying by "per say" instead of "per se". Ig he taked lik this ands realy did't mak cence then I gess I cod undr stand it. (If he talked like this and really didn't make sense, then I guess I could understand it.) But he made an honest mistake. These boards aren't The New York Times, or some English 101 Final Paper, it's a discussion about sports. Small Errors like that don't really change the world, or degrade it in any way. Comments like these are what degrades the boards, by focusing on grammar over the sports aesthetics that we're all here to talk about. And I'll take one out of your book [*walk's away muttering how some people just can't ignore a small misspelling* "INCONCEIVABLE!"] "And those who know Your Name put their trust in You, for You, O Lord, have not forsaken those who seek You." Psalms 9:10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FroBroStudio Posted March 8, 2016 Share Posted March 8, 2016 On 3/6/2016 at 1:15 PM, Ferdinand Cesarano said: MLS teams do have that option. Colorado didn't have a shirt sponsor for a while, and their shirts looked so nice. Oh. Didn't know they still had that option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt. America Posted March 14, 2016 Share Posted March 14, 2016 On March 1, 2016 at 1:38 PM, Silver_Star said: That is why I like Texas A&M's white helmets. It goes back or traces back to their 1973 look. Plus, they were better in white helmets than that of the maroon helmets because the style of the look since it is the old throwbacks. BUT, I wish they do something about the numbers. I like the block numbers of their old look better than that crappy stylized one! Similar to how I feel about block shadow, Denver Broncos Copperplate Gothic numbers or whatever typeface they use. Then Minnesota Vikings stupid serif that swifts like the number is getting blown hard!!! One idea I have been playing with is actually adding a third official color to A&M's palate: Navy Blue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.