(U)seless (M)emebers (O)nly

yay or nay

  • yes, an adult forum is okay with me

    Votes: 23 47.9%

  • no, an adult forum is not okay with me

    Votes: 25 52.1%
  • Total voters
    48
  • Poll closed .
Damn people and their grammar and spelling issues.


BTW...what was wrong with my grammar? I am always willing to learn something new.
 
Last edited:
Dream said:
Damn people and their grammar and spelling issues.


BTW...what was wrong with my grammar? I am always willing to learn something new.
Click to expand...
It's clunky. I cant remember the exact rule but:

"This is the most controversial thread I have read in a long time."

"the most controversial" is a definite description.

"thread" for this purpose is a thing.

You are describing the actual thread as something controversial. The thread itself is not what you are talking about though. You are talking about the contents of it, which are also definite things. The opinions expressed in posts which make up the thread are argumentative but for them to be controversial there would have to be arguments about the actual posts, which there are not.

You are characterizing the interaction of people in the thread, which is also not controversial, because no one is talking about that. Now you could say "This is the most controversial topic I have read [or seen] in a long time", which makes a whole lot more sense. "This is the most controversy filled thread I have read in a long time" also gets your point across.

Your original sentence can be considered OK, but one would have to know what you are talking about to read what you wrote correctly, and even then it takes a second.
 
FlamingGlory said:
It's clunky. I cant remember the exact rule but:

"This is the most controversial thread I have read in a long time."

"the most controversial" is a definite description.

"thread" for this purpose is a thing.

You are describing the actual thread as something controversial. The thread itself is not what you are talking about though. You are talking about the contents of it, which are also definite things. The opinions expressed in posts which make up the thread are argumentative but for them to be controversial there would have to be arguments about the actual posts, which there are not.

You are characterizing the interaction of people in the thread, which is also not controversial, because no one is talking about that. Now you could say "This is the most controversial topic I have read [or seen] in a long time", which makes a whole lot more sense. "This is the most controversy filled thread I have read in a long time" also gets your point across.

Your original sentence can be considered OK, but one would have to know what you are talking about to read what you wrote correctly, and even then it takes a second.
Click to expand...

Dood I :heart: U but holy fuck you're a nerd.
 
FlamingGlory said:
It's clunky. I cant remember the exact rule but:

"This is the most controversial thread I have read in a long time."

"the most controversial" is a definite description.

"thread" for this purpose is a thing.

You are describing the actual thread as something controversial. The thread itself is not what you are talking about though. You are talking about the contents of it, which are also definite things. The opinions expressed in posts which make up the thread are argumentative but for them to be controversial there would have to be arguments about the actual posts, which there are not.

You are characterizing the interaction of people in the thread, which is also not controversial, because no one is talking about that. Now you could say "This is the most controversial topic I have read [or seen] in a long time", which makes a whole lot more sense. "This is the most controversy filled thread I have read in a long time" also gets your point across.

Your original sentence can be considered OK, but one would have to know what you are talking about to read what you wrote correctly, and even then it takes a second.
Click to expand...


You tell her she shouldn't say it's a controversial thread, but then you suggest "controversy filled". Does not compute.
 
FlamingGlory said:
:p


Yeah, the thread has controvery but the actual thread is not controversial. Subject object. . .
Click to expand...

If a thread contains controversy, then you can say that it is controversial. Without replies and posts you wouldn't have a thread to begin with. Perpetuation. The sum of the parts equals the whole, etc. If a food has sugar in it, the food is sweet. Not just the sugar molecules within.
 
Sarcasmo said:
If a thread contains controversy, then you can say that it is controversial. Without replies and posts you wouldn't have a thread to begin with. Perpetuation. The sum of the parts equals the whole, etc. If a food has sugar in it, the food is sweet. Not just the sugar molecules within.
Click to expand...

The thread isnt controversial though. It's explicitly neutral. If someone made another thread and then people argued about this thread it would be controversial. This isnt grammar, it's just style. I said that in my first post.
 
FlamingGlory said:
The thread isnt controversial though. It's explicitly neutral. If someone made another thread and then people argued about this thread it would be controversial. This isnt grammar, it's just style. I said that in my first post.
Click to expand...

Then again, she shouldn't say the thread is controversy filled either.
 
Sarcasmo said:
Then again, she shouldn't say the thread is controversy filled either.
Click to expand...

That was my second suggestion trying to better translate what she said. It's correct though because "controversy is a noun in that case, one may say a thread is "filled" or "contains" something.

The first suggestion is closer to what she actually said, with "controversial" describing what is being disputed, i.e. the "topic", by the people in the thread.

NO ONE is arguing over the actual thread though. Which is what the original sentence means.

You see where I'm going?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back