You Can't Use the Letter "E"

A tricky task for all you folks:

Can you post a substantial ANYTHING without using that…symbol…following “D” and prior to “F”?

[I’m batty just from writing THIS post.)

so what counts as a substantial anything? a post similar to this? or a post with an actual point? anyways though, i can avoid that unholy symbol following “d”, as long as you don’t mind my sig. damn i’m good. hoo hah!


I’m not going to attempt it, but there’s no need – anything we might try has already been outdone by several orders of magnitude.

Go find a book called A Void, by Georges Perec. It’s 283 pages, with not a single “e” used. What’s more impressive is that it’s translated from the original work in French, which also eschewed the letter “e.”

In my D&D campaign, this is a way of symbolizing how difficult it is to talk in an idiom with which you maintain only a passing familiarity. Only have one point in Orcish? Okay, talk without using that um… thingy.

Funny dialog follows.

Okay. No prob.

Hmm… This should be intriguing.
Cap’b, you got a…sinful…thing in your sig. Just thought I’d point it out. You too, (ynh).

I know that I COULD jot down many words in a row without using that particular symbol. If I put my mind to it, I could do a full paragraph. But why should I? What for? Supposing I did it, would you mail a million dollars to good old Astorian?

I say that your proposal is absurd. Only a moron with too many hours on his hands would try.


Crap! I messed up:

Oh yeah, by the way, I give up. :rolleyes:

[Simpsons quto*]
Burns: OK, lt’s mak this sporting, Lonard. If you can tll m* why I shouldn’t fir* you without using the lttr “*”, you can k**p your job.

L*nny: Uh, OK. Um, I’m a good…work…guy –

Burns: You’re fir*d.

L*nny: But I didn’t say –

Burns: [convincd crtainty] You will. [push*s a button]

L*nny: [falling through a trap door] ********!
[/simpsons quto

Inform this contributor as to how fittingly this conforms to your standard of “anything substantial” without our script’s most common symbol:

It is said that if you drink Coca-Cola and mix in Pop Rocks in your mouth, it is a fatal combination. In fact, a child star of a famous 1970’s TV ad was slain in just this way, or so it is said. (I doubt this part is so.) Anybody know anything additional about what occurs if said foodstuffs mix?

You know what? Don’t worry about it. I’ll start my own…um… “string of posts” on this topic. I badly want to know.

Hot damn. How was that? :smiley:


It’s funny you 'd bring this up. I got a old digital manipulation input facilitator from a buddy. But it was missing a singular point for manipulation. It was very frustrating, trying to find out the ID of that missing point.
<slight hijack> What am I talking about? </slight hijack>

Oh, and no…shortcuts. I don’t want to vision any *'s in the location of that symbol. Such would be fraud.

And how should this board called? Possibly “A Straight Facts” or “The Straight Data.” Mr. Adams would want an unfamiliar calling. Our board officials would too…such as “My Dad’s Sibling’s Alcohol.” :slight_smile:

My cranium hurts.

A post that is worth looking at:

Bush sucks and is a moron. His party is full of crooks and liars. Ally with his opposition!

D&R [which is short for ducks and runs]

What do you qualify as “substantial”? It’s all within opinions of individuals straining to post without using that vital part of communication.

What can I possibly gain from this? Is my lack of a particular symbol within my postings an indication of my brain’s ability to fashion works of innovation? Or could it possibly show an unknowing world how small symbols play big parts in our day to day living? What can this inquiry bring to light?

I proposition that, dissimilar to most postings on this good board of ours, this task allows us to work out our minds in original ways, without using Altavista or similar tools, which only clog up our postings anyway. Put bluntly, this may show us all how original thoughts bring to light original minds.

Thank you all, and goodnight.

I’m not going to try it out yet, either… but your post made me think of something. Yes, I had heard of that book and the translation before, but did you all know that there is an actual name for a work using no e’s? I’m pretty sure it’s called a “lipogram”, and that one example of a lipogram was “Gadsby” by Ernest Wright. I tried to go to A Word A Day to check, but the search engine wouldn’t let me search for it. (see the thread I just posted in GQ for more information)

There’s always for the meaning of the word, though… which I will now try:

Just some information for people that might be interested, that’s all! :slight_smile:

How sad: “a, i, o, u and occasionally y” looks so wrong without it. I wish it wasn’t off limits for this forum.

Why couldn’t I?

Zv Stinhardt

'Twas did in a similar communication-combo of past, and is still difficult now. This actually is a nutsy way of talking, but if it is law, so it is.

Absurd try, frm. I say this only to say Sir Burns is an absurdist plutocrat. That dad/husband man of family Simpson is lucky that his job is still his.

Ah, but what would I say without that thing? Could I say anything I want to? I doubt it. For without that thing, I doubt anything of import could pass from my fingers. So, that said, I will withdraw from this discussion.

Good day.

Zv Stinhardt