[Archive! - page 463

New comment
 
tara:

Bez vei, so no masa...

Can I have one last wish: a semantic analysis of the expression:"... relax on the idiots..." ?

(concentrating) Ask a specific question.

Bullshit. Ah - the answer!

 

I've already asked.

Analyse the semantics of the expression, if you please:"... to relax on idiots...".

 

I'm talking to you as a linguist

 
Svinozavr:

Forget it... As a linguist, I don't give a shit. I don't give a shit.


Thank you. (chuckles)
 
tara:

Thank you!
Shit question, ask...
 
 

There is an intrigue surrounding the presidential election

Mischek: Голосовалка текущий результат для мну не ожиданный слегка даже

Yes, it was the "party of the Internet" that voted, not the "party of television" (see link above).

 

Nothing unexpected, except - exact values :)

imho, there are three personalities and five clowns on the list.

 
Mischek:


You have not been to Libya but you know the situation. And the question for me "why they bombed" is rhetorical. So I should have shared my thoughts. I did. Turns out I didn't answer the question. That's funny.

You haven't lived in the West, but their values you don't know about you don't like. Funny.

Everything is based on ---INFORMATION ( with some degree of credibility, the closer to the source the more credible, the more of it the more credible)-------- ANALYSIS ( taking into account the configuration of your own computer in your head) ------- CONCLUSION

On the basis of the lack of information, the conclusion will be crooked. You understand that, but for some reason it does not stop you from being confident in your conclusions about Libya (unlike me, I immediately reported that I was not there and share assumptions)

and also about Western values.

You know, Mish, I even wrote a good half of the multibooks and then deleted them. I changed my mind, I didn't feel like it.
 

Here's an interesting thing to note: there's talk of credibility.

What is it?

1...456457458459460461462463464465466467468469470...707
New comment