 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/11/2017 7:06 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Thu, 11 May 2017 17:56:51 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 5/11/2017 5:34 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>>>> I have seen the sea on fire and a burning circle in the sky.
>>>>>>>>> It was a sign writ large in flame.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "We apologise for the inconvenience"?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>> "Would you please make your way to your designated lifeboat."
>>> I like my answer better.:)
>>>
>>>
>> So would I but unfortunately...
>> We were stood by the lifeboats for about six hours. It was some trip. :)
>
> Ah, well, in that case, your answer is the better answer. Mine's just a
> reference to H2G2. :)
>
But my answer to your answer was a continuation in the same style. With
a soupspoon of RL.
There was a "please" in the sentence!
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 11 May 2017 19:30:02 +0100, Stephen wrote:
> On 5/11/2017 7:06 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Thu, 11 May 2017 17:56:51 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/11/2017 5:34 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>>>>> I have seen the sea on fire and a burning circle in the sky.
>>>>>>>>>> It was a sign writ large in flame.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "We apologise for the inconvenience"?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Would you please make your way to your designated lifeboat."
>>>> I like my answer better.:)
>>>>
>>>>
>>> So would I but unfortunately...
>>> We were stood by the lifeboats for about six hours. It was some trip.
>>> :)
>>
>> Ah, well, in that case, your answer is the better answer. Mine's just
>> a reference to H2G2. :)
>>
>>
> But my answer to your answer was a continuation in the same style. With
> a soupspoon of RL.
> There was a "please" in the sentence!
That did seem odd to me. :)
--
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11-5-2017 13:28, Stephen wrote:
> On 5/11/2017 11:59 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 11-5-2017 10:22, Stephen wrote:
>>> On 5/11/2017 7:54 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>> On 10-5-2017 22:19, dick balaska wrote:
>>>>> Am 2017-05-10 09:36, also sprach clipka:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dummo. Everyone knows the Anunaki are refueling the sun every couple
>>>>>> hundred years.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Blasphemer! Jesus does it. Like when we were running out of oil in
>>>>> the
>>>>> 70s and then Jesus made us more. (Bible belters actually believe
>>>>> this.)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Gentlemen, I am beginning to /believe/ that this little corner of the
>>>> internet is the nexus of different overlapping world realities.
>>>
>>> Slow, aren't you? ;-)
>>
>> I do what I can.
>>
>>>
>>>> I suspect we could not meet, even if we wanted to. A pity, as I would
>>>> much
>>>> like to take you on one of our steam punk rocket visits through the
>>>> Dutch Continental Empire (DCE; I guess that some of you call that the
>>>> European Union? I am not sure)
>>>
>>> That would be nice. Then we could jaunt off in my interdimensional,
>>> travelling pawn shop. You get to see some of the best parts. :-)
>>>
>>
>> That would certainly be nice. The interdimensionality though is still a
>> problem, except for words it seems.
>>
>
> Still unsure?
Walking a thin line here....
>
>>>
>>>
>>>> and especially to our new conquered
>>>> province of Engelland.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm glad someone's finally taking responsibility for them. They have
>>> been a hell of a neighbour. Since the French took over. ;-)
>>>
>>
>> Oh! Responsibility is a big word.
>
> It is, as you will know from that Spanish time.
Oh them! A boot in their lower back and good riddance!
>
>> We just put them to work to keep their
>> mind off trivial things.
>>
>
> You're not saying that work will make them free, are you?
>
>
Of course not! Bind them to their looms I say! As one of their minor
authors once wrote: "and in darkness bind them". That is exactly right
to increase production.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/12/2017 8:06 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>
>>> That would certainly be nice. The interdimensionality though is still a
>>> problem, except for words it seems.
>>>
>>
>> Still unsure?
>
> Walking a thin line here....
>
>>
Okay, I can take a hint. :-)
>>>
>>> Oh! Responsibility is a big word.
>>
>> It is, as you will know from that Spanish time.
>
> Oh them! A boot in their lower back and good riddance!
>
>>
So say thee, now.
At the time you had a lot to say about it. :-)
>>
>> You're not saying that work will make them free, are you?
>>
>>
>
> Of course not! Bind them to their looms I say! As one of their minor
> authors once wrote: "and in darkness bind them". That is exactly right
> to increase production.
>
Good luck with that, then. They are an unruly lot. Much want to rabble
and rouse. Once they get the scent of pink gin. They are harder to herd
than cats.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 12-5-2017 9:32, Stephen wrote:
> On 5/12/2017 8:06 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>>
>>>> That would certainly be nice. The interdimensionality though is still a
>>>> problem, except for words it seems.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Still unsure?
>>
>> Walking a thin line here....
>>
>>>
>
> Okay, I can take a hint. :-)
Equipoise is always a tricky business...
>
>
>>>>
>>>> Oh! Responsibility is a big word.
>>>
>>> It is, as you will know from that Spanish time.
>>
>> Oh them! A boot in their lower back and good riddance!
>>
>>>
>
> So say thee, now.
> At the time you had a lot to say about it. :-)
We did, we did! We are of the bragging sort. See our period paintings. :-)
>
>
>
>>>
>>> You're not saying that work will make them free, are you?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Of course not! Bind them to their looms I say! As one of their minor
>> authors once wrote: "and in darkness bind them". That is exactly right
>> to increase production.
>>
>
> Good luck with that, then. They are an unruly lot. Much want to rabble
> and rouse. Once they get the scent of pink gin. They are harder to herd
> than cats.
>
>
Water be the strongest drink then. The Thames can be put to good use for
that.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/12/2017 11:54 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> So say thee, now.
>> At the time you had a lot to say about it. :-)
>
> We did, we did! We are of the bragging sort. See our period paintings. :-)
>
>>
Funny, how whenever we imagine ourselves in the past. We are almost
always well off.
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>> You're not saying that work will make them free, are you?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Of course not! Bind them to their looms I say! As one of their minor
>>> authors once wrote: "and in darkness bind them". That is exactly right
>>> to increase production.
>>>
>>
>> Good luck with that, then. They are an unruly lot. Much want to rabble
>> and rouse. Once they get the scent of pink gin. They are harder to herd
>> than cats.
>>
>>
>
> Water be the strongest drink then. The Thames can be put to good use for
> that.
Now that that is going too far. Where's this famed Dutch courage?
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 13-5-2017 12:03, Stephen wrote:
> On 5/12/2017 11:54 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>> So say thee, now.
>>> At the time you had a lot to say about it. :-)
>>
>> We did, we did! We are of the bragging sort. See our period paintings.
>> :-)
>>
>>>
>
>
> Funny, how whenever we imagine ourselves in the past. We are almost
> always well off.
All joking aside, the wealth is what remains tangible I think, more than
poverty and decrepitude which are rapidly erased by the wear and tear of
history and age.
Interestingly, in that respect, there has been a book published recently
of letters from wives to sailors on the Dutch ships during the wars we
fought against each others. Those letters were intercepted by English
privateers and so never reached destination. It is amazing to see how
literate those humble women were in those days; reading and writing was
rather common and especially the reading of gazettes, which were also
sent alongside the letters.
>
>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You're not saying that work will make them free, are you?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Of course not! Bind them to their looms I say! As one of their minor
>>>> authors once wrote: "and in darkness bind them". That is exactly right
>>>> to increase production.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Good luck with that, then. They are an unruly lot. Much want to rabble
>>> and rouse. Once they get the scent of pink gin. They are harder to herd
>>> than cats.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Water be the strongest drink then. The Thames can be put to good use for
>> that.
>
> Now that that is going too far. Where's this famed Dutch courage?
>
Indeed, where?
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 13.05.2017 um 12:59 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
> All joking aside, the wealth is what remains tangible I think, more than
> poverty and decrepitude which are rapidly erased by the wear and tear of
> history and age.
>
> Interestingly, in that respect, there has been a book published recently
> of letters from wives to sailors on the Dutch ships during the wars we
> fought against each others. Those letters were intercepted by English
> privateers and so never reached destination. It is amazing to see how
> literate those humble women were in those days; reading and writing was
> rather common and especially the reading of gazettes, which were also
> sent alongside the letters.
I would be wary of sampling bias when assessing the literacy of a group
of people by such a sample of letters sent.
For example, people of poor literacy might have tended to send fewer
letters than their more literate peers, causing them to be
underrepresented in the sample; and illiterate people will be excluded
from the sample entirely for obvious reasons.
Also, the letters might not necessarily reflect the literacy of the
purported authors, as there is at least the possibility that they might
have been dictated into the hand of a more literate member of the
household or neighborhood.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/13/2017 12:48 PM, clipka wrote:
> Am 13.05.2017 um 12:59 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>
>> All joking aside, the wealth is what remains tangible I think, more than
>> poverty and decrepitude which are rapidly erased by the wear and tear of
>> history and age.
>>
>> Interestingly, in that respect, there has been a book published recently
>> of letters from wives to sailors on the Dutch ships during the wars we
>> fought against each others. Those letters were intercepted by English
>> privateers and so never reached destination. It is amazing to see how
>> literate those humble women were in those days; reading and writing was
>> rather common and especially the reading of gazettes, which were also
>> sent alongside the letters.
>
> I would be wary of sampling bias when assessing the literacy of a group
> of people by such a sample of letters sent.
>
> For example, people of poor literacy might have tended to send fewer
> letters than their more literate peers, causing them to be
> underrepresented in the sample; and illiterate people will be excluded
> from the sample entirely for obvious reasons.
>
> Also, the letters might not necessarily reflect the literacy of the
> purported authors, as there is at least the possibility that they might
> have been dictated into the hand of a more literate member of the
> household or neighborhood.
>
All what you say is true. But it was also the Age of Enlightenment and
literacy rates were rising.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 13-5-2017 14:15, Stephen wrote:
> On 5/13/2017 12:48 PM, clipka wrote:
>> Am 13.05.2017 um 12:59 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>>
>>> All joking aside, the wealth is what remains tangible I think, more than
>>> poverty and decrepitude which are rapidly erased by the wear and tear of
>>> history and age.
>>>
>>> Interestingly, in that respect, there has been a book published recently
>>> of letters from wives to sailors on the Dutch ships during the wars we
>>> fought against each others. Those letters were intercepted by English
>>> privateers and so never reached destination. It is amazing to see how
>>> literate those humble women were in those days; reading and writing was
>>> rather common and especially the reading of gazettes, which were also
>>> sent alongside the letters.
>>
>> I would be wary of sampling bias when assessing the literacy of a group
>> of people by such a sample of letters sent.
>>
>> For example, people of poor literacy might have tended to send fewer
>> letters than their more literate peers, causing them to be
>> underrepresented in the sample; and illiterate people will be excluded
>> from the sample entirely for obvious reasons.
>>
>> Also, the letters might not necessarily reflect the literacy of the
>> purported authors, as there is at least the possibility that they might
>> have been dictated into the hand of a more literate member of the
>> household or neighborhood.
>>
>
>
> All what you say is true. But it was also the Age of Enlightenment and
> literacy rates were rising.
>
I agree with both of you but must add that not only literacy was rising,
but in the Netherlands it was one of the highest in Europe at the time,
particularly with women whose husbands were at sea and who had to carry
on their business at home. It was one of the few countries (if not the
only one) were women were entitled to own a shop or trade independently
from husbands or male relatives.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
