A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital SLR Cameras
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Britain's horrific new photo law



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old February 22nd 09, 09:25 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital
DRS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 430
Default Britain's horrific new photo law

"Robert Coe" wrote in message

On Fri, 20 Feb 2009 02:48:21 +1100, "DRS"
wrote:
"HEMI-Powered" wrote in message

You have allowed your country to become a vast Socialist nanny
state where everything is "free" and everything is controlled. So,
why are you so surprised that the State now wants to chip away at
your freedoms one by one? Your country has never had a formal
consitution which states all of your freedoms, rights, and
protections as does the US Constitution and Bill of Rights which
leads me to believe you got just what you deserved. The fix? Vote
the Socialists clowns out of office, elect some representatives
that will do what the people want them to do and NOT do what the
people don't want them to do, write a formal document defining your
rights, and take back your country from the Socialists.


You first. Get rid of the Patriot Act, the warrantless wiretapping
and all the rest and then you can talk.


We have, at least, finally gotten rid of the worst of the clueless
goobers who foisted those outrages on us (which, I guess, is one of
the things that has made Jerry so apoplectic). So please cut us some
slack while the new guys try to shovel the place out.


Obama has made it clear there will be no investigation, much less
prosecution, of Bush Administration officials who broke both domestic and
international laws on things like torture because he is focused on "moving
forward", as if crimes are not always prosecuted after the fact. So much
for his promise to restore the rule of law in America. He's made some
symbolic gestures (ie, closing Gitmo down was easy because it had become a
huge embarrasment anyway) but I'm not seeing substantive change. Hardly
surprising, really, since half his administration consists of Republicans
who help create the various messes he inherited in the first place.


  #32  
Old February 22nd 09, 09:29 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital
DRS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 430
Default Britain's horrific new photo law

"Ron Hunter" wrote in message

tony cooper wrote:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 15:55:21 -0600, Ron Hunter
wrote:


[...]

It seems that modern
writers, even those with college degrees subscribe to the theory
that if it sounds the same, what's the difference? Sigh.


You teach? Not English, I hope. The above paragraph is full of
punctuation errors. You need to brush up on the use of commas.

I usually use too many commas. Did you find it hard to understand?
Comma rules are a bit 'fuzzy', and greatly different than they were 55
years or so, when I learned English.


The rules on subordinate clauses haven't changed. For example, your
sentence cited above should read:

"It seems that modern writers, even those with college degrees, subscribe to
the theory that if it sounds the same what's the difference?"


  #33  
Old February 22nd 09, 09:45 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital
Ron Hunter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,064
Default Britain's horrific new photo law

N wrote:
"tony cooper" wrote in message
...
There are so many people who don't understand the difference between
"your" and "you're" that I have just about given up on it, except for
trying to teach it to my students... One of the errors that seems to be
more frequent than it used to be is "then" and "than" being misused, as
well as "do" and "due". It seems that modern writers, even those with
college degrees subscribe to the theory that if it sounds the same,
what's the difference? Sigh.

You teach? Not English, I hope. The above paragraph is full of
punctuation errors. You need to brush up on the use of commas.



Please explain the errors. My only comment on the paragraph, is that there
are too few commas.

Actually, I should have put a comma after 'degrees'. But then, this
isn't really 'formal writing', is it?
  #34  
Old February 22nd 09, 09:48 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital
Ron Hunter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,064
Default Britain's horrific new photo law

tony cooper wrote:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 19:57:04 -0600, Ron Hunter
wrote:

tony cooper wrote:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 15:55:21 -0600, Ron Hunter
wrote:

jaf wrote:
Hence the proliferation of spell checkers.
Now if I could only get the grandma checker to kick in. 8)


John


"Twibil" wrote in message ...
On Feb 20, 10:44 am, "jaf" wrote:
So your stating that the democratic controlled congress during the Bush administration never passed an intelligent bill?

I have no problem believing that!
And we have no problem believing that you never learned in grade
school what the contraction "you're" means (it means "you are") as
opposed to "your", meaning "belonging to you".

BTW: while you're looking things up, check out procedural stalling
tactics and Presidential veto powers.
There are so many people who don't understand the difference between
"your" and "you're" that I have just about given up on it, except for
trying to teach it to my students... One of the errors that seems to be
more frequent than it used to be is "then" and "than" being misused, as
well as "do" and "due". It seems that modern writers, even those with
college degrees subscribe to the theory that if it sounds the same,
what's the difference? Sigh.
You teach? Not English, I hope. The above paragraph is full of
punctuation errors. You need to brush up on the use of commas.


I usually use too many commas. Did you find it hard to understand?
Comma rules are a bit 'fuzzy', and greatly different than they were 55
years or so, when I learned English.


It's not the number; it's the placement. I would not normally point
something like this out in this newsgroup, but you did open the door
with your comments about usage.

Personally, I attribute the incorrect usage of "you're" and "your" to
be a result of fingers flying on autopilot. The writer probably knows
the difference, but an errant twitch of the finger sticks the
apostrophe in there. The one that bugs me is "loose" and "looser" for
"lose" and "loser". I don't think those writers know the difference.




Maybe. I am still trying to pin that one down. I seem to see it quite
often in UK writer's work. Maybe the usage is different there, or maybe
it is another case of "If it sounds the same, it's the same."
  #35  
Old February 22nd 09, 09:53 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital
Ron Hunter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,064
Default Britain's horrific new photo law

DRS wrote:
"Robert Coe" wrote in message

On Fri, 20 Feb 2009 02:48:21 +1100, "DRS"
wrote:
"HEMI-Powered" wrote in message

You have allowed your country to become a vast Socialist nanny
state where everything is "free" and everything is controlled. So,
why are you so surprised that the State now wants to chip away at
your freedoms one by one? Your country has never had a formal
consitution which states all of your freedoms, rights, and
protections as does the US Constitution and Bill of Rights which
leads me to believe you got just what you deserved. The fix? Vote
the Socialists clowns out of office, elect some representatives
that will do what the people want them to do and NOT do what the
people don't want them to do, write a formal document defining your
rights, and take back your country from the Socialists.
You first. Get rid of the Patriot Act, the warrantless wiretapping
and all the rest and then you can talk.

We have, at least, finally gotten rid of the worst of the clueless
goobers who foisted those outrages on us (which, I guess, is one of
the things that has made Jerry so apoplectic). So please cut us some
slack while the new guys try to shovel the place out.


Obama has made it clear there will be no investigation, much less
prosecution, of Bush Administration officials who broke both domestic and
international laws on things like torture because he is focused on "moving
forward", as if crimes are not always prosecuted after the fact. So much
for his promise to restore the rule of law in America. He's made some
symbolic gestures (ie, closing Gitmo down was easy because it had become a
huge embarrasment anyway) but I'm not seeing substantive change. Hardly
surprising, really, since half his administration consists of Republicans
who help create the various messes he inherited in the first place.


You have a very interesting POV. In reality, government in the US (and
I suspect every country) is driven of things other than laws, and
international agreements. I suspect than when Obama found out just how
things REALLY are at his National Security and other classified
briefings, his reaction was "What have I gotten myself into?" I suspect
it is the same for each president. It's a job no sane person would ever
willingly take, which tells you a lot about presidents in general. Bush
had his 9-11, and Obama has an economic meltdown. I only hope that
Obama does as well with his crisis as Bush did with his. If so, then by
the end of his first year, we will all be safe from any further economic
woes. Somehow I suspect that will NOT happen because Democrats just
don't understand economics.
  #36  
Old February 22nd 09, 09:54 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital
Ron Hunter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,064
Default Britain's horrific new photo law

DRS wrote:
"Ron Hunter" wrote in message

tony cooper wrote:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 15:55:21 -0600, Ron Hunter
wrote:


[...]

It seems that modern
writers, even those with college degrees subscribe to the theory
that if it sounds the same, what's the difference? Sigh.
You teach? Not English, I hope. The above paragraph is full of
punctuation errors. You need to brush up on the use of commas.

I usually use too many commas. Did you find it hard to understand?
Comma rules are a bit 'fuzzy', and greatly different than they were 55
years or so, when I learned English.


The rules on subordinate clauses haven't changed. For example, your
sentence cited above should read:

"It seems that modern writers, even those with college degrees, subscribe to
the theory that if it sounds the same what's the difference?"


You are correct, as I mentioned in an earlier message. Thanks for the
reminder to police my comma usage. Can I blame it on bad typing?
  #37  
Old February 22nd 09, 10:21 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital
Paul Arthur
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 32
Default Britain's horrific new photo law

On 2009-02-22, DRS wrote:

"Ron Hunter" wrote in message


tony cooper wrote:

On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 15:55:21 -0600, Ron Hunter
wrote:


It seems that modern writers, even those with college degrees
subscribe to the theory that if it sounds the same, what's the
difference? Sigh.

You teach? Not English, I hope. The above paragraph is full of
punctuation errors. You need to brush up on the use of commas.


I usually use too many commas. Did you find it hard to understand?
Comma rules are a bit 'fuzzy', and greatly different than they were
55 years or so, when I learned English.


The rules on subordinate clauses haven't changed. For example, your
sentence cited above should read:

"It seems that modern writers, even those with college degrees,
subscribe to the theory that if it sounds the same what's the
difference?"


No, it should read 'It seams that modern righters, even those with
college degrees, subscribe to the theory "if it sounds the same,
what's the difference?"'

You added a missing comma and removed a necessary one. The original
sentence wasn't particularly unreadable, and writing for usenet
doesn't need to be taken as seriously as professional writing. An
occasional lapse in grammar or spelling is quite forgivable.
  #38  
Old February 22nd 09, 01:42 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital
DRS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 430
Default Britain's horrific new photo law

"Paul Arthur" wrote in message
om
On 2009-02-22, DRS wrote:


[...]

The rules on subordinate clauses haven't changed. For example, your
sentence cited above should read:

"It seems that modern writers, even those with college degrees,
subscribe to the theory that if it sounds the same what's the
difference?"


No, it should read 'It seams that modern righters, even those with
college degrees, subscribe to the theory "if it sounds the same,
what's the difference?"'

You added a missing comma and removed a necessary one. The original


I disagree that the one I removed was necessary, but adding the one to
properly delineate the subordinate clause was.

sentence wasn't particularly unreadable, and writing for usenet
doesn't need to be taken as seriously as professional writing. An
occasional lapse in grammar or spelling is quite forgivable.


I ordinarily don't comment on grammar or punctuation errors in Usenet but in
this instance it was relevant.


  #39  
Old February 22nd 09, 03:06 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital
DRS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 430
Default Britain's horrific new photo law

"Paul Arthur" wrote in message
om
On 2009-02-22, DRS wrote:
"Paul Arthur" wrote in message
om
On 2009-02-22, DRS wrote:


[...]

The rules on subordinate clauses haven't changed. For example, your
sentence cited above should read:

"It seems that modern writers, even those with college degrees,
subscribe to the theory that if it sounds the same what's the
difference?"

No, it should read 'It seams that modern righters, even those with
college degrees, subscribe to the theory "if it sounds the same,
what's the difference?"'

You added a missing comma and removed a necessary one. The original


I disagree that the one I removed was necessary


Then you have no business correcting anyone's comma use.


Except for the fact that I am right. Take your attitude to someone who
gives a damn.


  #40  
Old February 22nd 09, 09:06 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital
Deep Reset
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 163
Default Britain's horrific new photo law


"N" wrote in message
...
"tony cooper" wrote in message
...
There are so many people who don't understand the difference between
"your" and "you're" that I have just about given up on it, except for
trying to teach it to my students... One of the errors that seems to be
more frequent than it used to be is "then" and "than" being misused, as
well as "do" and "due". It seems that modern writers, even those with
college degrees subscribe to the theory that if it sounds the same,
what's the difference? Sigh.


You teach? Not English, I hope. The above paragraph is full of
punctuation errors. You need to brush up on the use of commas.



Please explain the errors. My only comment on the paragraph, is that
there are too few commas.


Well, perhaps being overly picky, I'd say you had one too many in that last
sentence.

"My only comment on the paragraph is that there are too few commas. "

See? Works better, doesn't it?

Deep.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A truly HORRIFIC tsunami picture Mike Henley Digital Photography 872 January 30th 05 12:45 AM
A truly HORRIFIC tsunami picture Mike Henley 35mm Photo Equipment 234 January 7th 05 12:13 PM
A truly HORRIFIC tsunami picture Annika1980 35mm Photo Equipment 0 January 4th 05 10:02 PM
A truly HORRIFIC tsunami picture Annika1980 35mm Photo Equipment 0 January 4th 05 01:34 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.