Beck and her hubby have been shooting them. I’m sure they can hook you up.
verbatim
1. in a way that uses exactly the same words as were originally used: 2. using…
Beck and her hubby have been shooting them. I’m sure they can hook you up.
Well, you could always use the OP…
It strikes me as somewhat unsporting to be shooting hotdogs.
Beck and her hubby have been shooting them. I’m sure they can hook you up.
Let me know. I’ll get you a nice one.
(A nice filthy feral hog, not a hotdog, You’ll have to see Gato about weenie dogs)
My bold. Nope, not verbatim because RC didn’t use quotation marks, as already pointed out to you. If you had to add them, then it’s no longer verbatim. Not sure how many different ways I can explain this.
This tediously disingenuous semantic horse hockey brought to you by tediously disingenuous semantic horse hockey.
Not verbatim? Disingenuous horse-hockey?
in a way that uses exactly the same words as were originally used:
1. in a way that uses exactly the same words as were originally used: 2. using…
Poor widdle socky. There there socky, it’ll be ok. I’m sure we can find you a safe place so you’re widdle snowflake self doesn’t melt.
Thanks. Make sure it’s warm, plentiful pillows, a crying area complete with tissues, and several virgins.
Thanks. Make sure it’s warm, plentiful pillows, a crying area complete with tissues, and several virgins.
Why, so you can relive your days in the Boy Scouts?
Thanks. Make sure it’s warm, plentiful pillows, a crying area complete with tissues, and several virgins.
Why, so you can relive your days in the Boy Scouts?
No virgin would touch him.
Not verbatim? Disingenuous horse-hockey?
No-one’s calling its obviously known definition into question and it’s also not addressing the fact that you’ve altered the meaning of what you transcribed by adding quotes to the statement, immediately nullifying it as being verbatim. Any journalist who’d approach that otherwise would be crossing the line from honest reportage.
I don’t know where I can get a wild boar.
Some convenience stores around here carry boar. Great garnished with hot club aspic (skittles in consomme gelatin in ghost pepper sauce).
I always thought prunes ruined a good boar.*
*ETA - hm, possible sig?
No-one’s calling its obviously known definition into question and it’s also not addressing the fact that you’ve altered the meaning of what you transcribed by adding quotes to the statement, immediately nullifying it as being verbatim. Any journalist who’d approach that otherwise would be crossing the line from honest reportage.
I’ve altered the meaning by placing quotation marks around a single sentence in a 2 sentence post?
And reporters don’t do exactly that literally ALL the time?
That’s some thick bullshit right there.
I’ve altered the meaning by placing quotation marks around a single sentence in a 2 sentence post?
Sure, why not.
And reporters don’t do exactly that literally ALL the time
Um, dishonest ones? Care to cite any?
No-one’s calling its obviously known definition into question and it’s also not addressing the fact that you’ve altered the meaning of what you transcribed by adding quotes to the statement, immediately nullifying it as being verbatim. Any journalist who’d approach that otherwise would be crossing the line from honest reportage.
You’ve seen Annoyed’s first post, right? You can’t seriously believe he’s at all concerned about honest reportage.
Nope. Anyhoos, nodding off.
Out.
You’ve seen Annoyed’s first post, right? You can’t seriously believe he’s at all concerned about honest reportage.
You mean the one I placed in the pit because it’s circumstantial and so shots can be fired more freely?
What a horrible, dishonest character I have.
Sure, why not.
Because it’s a pathetic cop-out for being intentionally wrong, and misrepresenting what someone said.
What a horrible, dishonest character I have.
Well… yes.
Well… yes.
Clever.
No one, in the history of forums, has ever thought to snip another users post in such a way as to remove contextual sarcasm in an attempt to be amusing - until you came along.
Clever.
No one, in the history of forums, has ever thought to snip another users post in such a way as to remove contextual sarcasm in an attempt to be amusing - until you came along.
The second sentence in your post stands on its own. The first sentence didn’t provide context, just irrelevance.
And I don’t believe you care about honest reportage.
Because it’s a pathetic cop-out for being intentionally wrong, and misrepresenting what someone said.
Hmm…how about - would it work if I re-quoted Gyrate’s post for you in hopes it will finally register with you?
Except that running coach didn’t use quotation marks in his statement (remember quotation marks? You thought they were important earlier) - that was your addition, a deliberate misrepresentation on your part so that you could claim victory on the basis that Trump didn’t use those exact words. In fact running coach’s original paraphrase was entirely accurate in context; it’s you that’s persisting in this - what’s the term? - “intended deception” that it wasn’t.
But thank you for your ongoing demonstration of your dishonesty, liar.
Poor widdle socky. There there socky, it’ll be ok. I’m sure we can find you a safe place so you’re widdle snowflake self doesn’t melt.
That’s a good one! This is so much fun.
And speaking of wild boars, there was a papal bull issued back in the early 1500’s by Leo X I believe, titled “Exsurge Domine” * Arise Oh Lord and plead Thy cause, a wild boar has entered thy vineyard."* (It was against Martin Luther, btw)
I don’t acquaint the OP with Luther, but when it comes to bores, I mean boars…