Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jun 2009 15:42:28 -0500, Shay wrote:
>
> > alphaQuad wrote:
> >> not even worthy of a reply, now your just nitpicking
> >>
> >>
> > you're
>
> Heh, yeah, he got that wrong in the other thread as well.  But the other
> way around ("you're" where he meant "your").
>
> Jim

My Dear John Dense Rim, (note I use ALL the letters of his name)

You really have few clues running around in you're cob webs.


When I first saw shay's "you're" I wanted to say no sh|t shay, but no one would
have gotten that, and it would have seemed derogatory, so I opted for the
"person of few words" feigning ignorance. Skipped right off you're knoggin.

I once ran across a wed site devoted the difference between your and you're. The
guy was claiming his amazement at the people "who don't understand" the
difference between the two. So I wrote him explaining that the common
occurrence just happens even tho they do in fact understand it.

When I type, MY thoughts are into the next the paragraph while fingers TRY to
keep up. And the common mistake does happen often, this time I do it
intentionally just to make a humorous, albeit annoying, point. My thoughts are
EM based and at the speed of light while you'res just skip off the pond.


It just shows that you have lots of time at you're slow thought pace to sweat
the little stuff. And of course you're only purpose is to find fault, again
showing you're limited and slow thought pattern and the lack of intelligence to
focus on the important stuff that is so far beyond you're comprehension.

I should devote a whole web site to the brain density of the average human.

And of course you're only purpose is to find fault in an attempt to cause some
emotional expense to me(showing of what your made), if that were even possible,
but you have not gotten that clue either.

Post a reply to this message