Smackover, Arkansas Superthread

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
oh and as for the uk keyboards, i guess htat makes sense cause they use ' instead of '' for quotation marks. you can always hit ' twice, as i just did cause i have no idea where the real quote button is. actually i see it but it is third on 0= button and i dunno how to get it to show up. the at sign i dont even know. i have to cut and paste. the čćžšđł make sense (they take up the space for the right pinky rendering it actually useful and the enter button is smaller) cause those are legit common letters in bosnian-serbian-croatian.

ooooh i figrued out the ˝. wtf is ˘for?
 
no. you can send something to me in september.

have you listened to more low level owl? i fucking love the appleseed cast right now. have for over 2 months i guess.

They're a Tuareg band from the Sahara, they were involved in rebel actions in Mali and had their music banned and all kinds of stuff. Amazing sounds too, really original compared to anything else in my collection.

And no - I really should listen to more, Volume 1 is good.
 
oh and as for the uk keyboards, i guess htat makes sense cause they use ' instead of '' for quotation marks.

Zuh? We use the same grammar as them and the ' key produces " when Shift is held down.
 
i dunno if i can finish both my books and the magazines i want to read before i leave. another thing the new move disrupts because everything is uncertain.
 
Zuh? We use the same grammar as them and the ' key produces " when Shift is held down.
well then it is just dumb, who uses at for anything but email? and apparently bosnians NEVER use at as it is not on the god damned keyboard... oh wait finally found it @
 
well then it is just dumb, who uses at for anything but email? and apparently bosnians NEVER use at as it is not on the god damned keyboard... oh wait finally found it @

Anybody who DOES use @ for anything other than its e-mail use is just an annoying prat anyway. "c u @ 2" - no, I won't; not until you learn to spell.
 
you would think eventually they would stop taking a piss and realize that while they find that funny, it is kinda embarassing that the people who run the website seem to earnestly think it is worthy content.
Fair point.. although if that's all the site's being given, then I guess they feel obliged to try to talk it up or something. :huh:

Just make some bloody music already, guys!!


:wink:
 
Fair point.. although if that's all the site's being given, then I guess they feel obliged to try to talk it up or something. :huh:

I'd suggest that they use some initiative ... but it's U2.com we're talking about here.
 
Book? With pages? From a printing press?

That's soooo 13th-20th century, Ali. :tsk:
Wood pulp and ink... :drool:

I'm just reading about the period when printing was invented, and how the English government was trying to establish a standardised spelling and everything... Imagine petty bureaucrats having the power to determine how we're spelling everything today!

Kinda makes some of modern English's idiosyncracies more explicable, though.


Also, feel free to send me some of that Tuareg stuff, Ax... :D
 
Because it's the US and it's not meant to make sense? :wink:
Yes, that's a given :wink: But I was hoping someone knew the answer....

I'm proud to say I've never watched any of these U2.com vids, or any of these timewasting vids. But then again, I was completely ignorant of anything U2 did between the end of the Zoo tour in 1993 and when Pop came out in, what 96?
 
Anybody who DOES use @ for anything other than its e-mail use is just an annoying prat anyway. "c u @ 2" - no, I won't; not until you learn to spell.

I think it might be a leftover from shorthand, like I also think '&' is... and most people don't object if you use '&', although it would be a bit odd.

I know I was using @ and & and that other squiggle that means "with" a lot when I was taking notes at uni. :crack:
 
I'm just reading about the period when printing was invented, and how the English government was trying to establish a standardised spelling and everything... Imagine petty bureaucrats having the power to determine how we're spelling everything today!

Actually, I'd be down with that. I like how some languages have central authorities to determine how the language is spelt. Then we might actually avoid the US English bullshit officially, rather than having to just assert the Oxford English Dictionary as definitive.

Also, feel free to send me some of that Tuareg stuff, Ax... :D

If we're serious about doing a Phail recording session sometime soon, just bring over your MP3 player and plug it into my computer and I can give you stacks of music. :yes:
 
I think it might be a leftover from shorthand, like I also think '&' is... and most people don't object if you use '&', although it would be a bit odd.

I know I was using @ and & and that other squiggle that means "with" a lot when I was taking notes at uni. :crack:

I actually find @ takes longer to write by hand than 'at' does, and half the time it comes out so badly that I'm not sure entirely what it is. :lol:

I have been known to use & in my university notes on occasion, but it well and truly precedes Internet/text speak, so I can happily rationalise it that way. :wink:
 
I used to like reading hte journals here, now these new blogs suck. And the contents of some suck too.

I can't say I paid attention to them either before or after the site upgrade. How do they differ now?
 
Actually, I'd be down with that. I like how some languages have central authorities to determine how the language is spelt. Then we might actually avoid the US English bullshit officially, rather than having to just assert the Oxford English Dictionary as definitive.
It just blows my mind, though, that some anonymous guy in the 15th century had to figure out which of 500 possible spellings was going to be the standard, definitive, "correct" way of spelling "through", for instance, and that would be that for the rest of time. This one guy's decision determining the scores of millions of future school childrens' spelling tests... :wink:

And to be fair to the Americans, I think this book told me that they set about actually making a dictionary with standardised spellings and definitions before the English themselves did. The bit I'm reading now is just the beginnings of English being used as the official language of state, as opposed to French (which had been the case since the Norman invasion of 1066, all the way through until Henry V's time in the 1400s). So these clerks in London had to start spelling all the official documents the same way, but there wasn't a dictionary then, as such.

And if you think US spelling is weird the way it is now, it would have been a million times worse if Benjamin Franklin had got his way. :lol:

If we're serious about doing a Phail recording session sometime soon, just bring over your MP3 player and plug it into my computer and I can give you stacks of music. :yes:
That's right, I remember you said that before. :der:

Must remember to empty said mp3 player before we do that...
 
I actually find @ takes longer to write by hand than 'at' does, and half the time it comes out so badly that I'm not sure entirely what it is. :lol:

I have been known to use & in my university notes on occasion, but it well and truly precedes Internet/text speak, so I can happily rationalise it that way. :wink:

I am quite sure that @ existed before the internet... it's on my mum's antique typewriter, I'm sure of it! :wink:
 
Hey, folks, I'm proud of myself. Right now, I'm uploading a batch of nine photos. NONE of them are of trains or trams.
 
It just blows my mind, though, that some anonymous guy in the 15th century had to figure out which of 500 possible spellings was going to be the standard, definitive, "correct" way of spelling "through", for instance, and that would be that for the rest of time. This one guy's decision determining the scores of millions of future school childrens' spelling tests... :wink:

And to be fair to the Americans, I think this book told me that they set about actually making a dictionary with standardised spellings and definitions before the English themselves did. The bit I'm reading now is just the beginnings of English being used as the official language of state, as opposed to French (which had been the case since the Norman invasion of 1066, all the way through until Henry V's time in the 1400s). So these clerks in London had to start spelling all the official documents the same way, but there wasn't a dictionary then, as such.

And if you think US spelling is weird the way it is now, it would have been a million times worse if Benjamin Franklin had got his way. :lol:


That's right, I remember you said that before. :der:

Must remember to empty said mp3 player before we do that...
i just wanna say i like this post. sorry i got distracted by other parts of the internet.
 
It just blows my mind, though, that some anonymous guy in the 15th century had to figure out which of 500 possible spellings was going to be the standard, definitive, "correct" way of spelling "through", for instance, and that would be that for the rest of time. This one guy's decision determining the scores of millions of future school childrens' spelling tests... :wink:

And to be fair to the Americans, I think this book told me that they set about actually making a dictionary with standardised spellings and definitions before the English themselves did. The bit I'm reading now is just the beginnings of English being used as the official language of state, as opposed to French (which had been the case since the Norman invasion of 1066, all the way through until Henry V's time in the 1400s). So these clerks in London had to start spelling all the official documents the same way, but there wasn't a dictionary then, as such.

And if you think US spelling is weird the way it is now, it would have been a million times worse if Benjamin Franklin had got his way. :lol:


That's right, I remember you said that before. :der:

Must remember to empty said mp3 player before we do that...

Are you reading that Journey of English book, or whatever it's called? I enjoyed reading that, though I think it was a bit kind to American English and I felt its coverage beyond the UK and US was weak and superficial. And yeah, Benjamin Franklin's ideas were just a bit insane. I think the main problem with US English right now is that it is so similar to standard English - if it would just hurry up and diverge into its own dialect, then I wouldn't have a problem with it.

And that kind of job would be a nice power trip for a bureaucrat, huh? :wink:

I'll have to get in touch with U-Wen and see when would be a good time with him for a Phail session.
 
I can't say I paid attention to them either before or after the site upgrade. How do they differ now?
You used to be able to scroll down a long list and see everyone's name and see the topic title and be able to pick and choose what to read quite easily. NOw you can see about only about 10 and the first one is open in full, which is OK if it's interesting, and not OK if someone is having some existential crisis...

Gah, it's telling me to go to bed, see ya folks!
 
Evening, April! :wave:

:shocked:

You got a fever or something??

:laugh: To be fair, they were taken while on a train photographing expedition. They're from the Moonee Ponds Creek Trail, at the city end by the Tullamarine Freeway. A few of that Southern Star Observation Wheel (what a dumb name).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom