Originally posted by Jon_Snow
"not unwarranted" is a double negative
And?
djshire
MSZ
Leaked footage of James25's dj gig.
Jon_Snow
quote:
Originally posted by ziptnf
And?
his vitriol is either warranted or unwarranted
boris_the_bear
ziptnf
quote:
Originally posted by Jon_Snow
his vitriol is either warranted or unwarranted
you, suck my dick.
SYSTEM-J
quote:
Originally posted by Jon_Snow
his vitriol is either warranted or unwarranted
Oh shut up, IGK. A double negative can be used to create a number of deliberate rhetorical effects, and there's nothing wrong with what Nick wrote. In this instance, much as one might say "It's not without merit" instead of "It has merit", the use of "not unwarranted" implies a partial, slightly begrudging shade to the sentiment. It's the difference between implying "You're not entirely wrong to hate me" and "You're right to hate me."
Now get back in your box.
Lira
quote:
Originally posted by ziptnf
All right, James, here's the thing: If someone wronged you on TA, and you have proof your info was leaked here, then by all means show me what you've got. However, if you threaten someone like this, over TA, I will have to suspend you.
You've accused nearly everyone, failed to produce any evidence, and now you're sending threats. That's enough. You have ONE final post to show what proof you have against people here, regarding events that happened here. Not on Facebook, not on Twitter, not on the ing moon. Overhere.
If you don't, you're banned, because I'm clearly not the first moderator to suspend you. If, once again, you send a single threat, you're also banned. And by "banned" I don't mean for a couple of weeks. I mean banned until the heat death of the universe is so far in the past not even the atoms of your skeleton will be around to type anything.
So, there, show us what you've got or get lost.
Jon_Snow
quote:
Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
Oh shut up, IGK. A double negative can be used to create a number of deliberate rhetorical effects, and there's nothing wrong with what Nick wrote. In this instance, much as one might say "It's not without merit" instead of "It has merit", the use of "not unwarranted" implies a partial, slightly begrudging shade to the sentiment. It's the difference between implying "You're not entirely wrong to hate me" and "You're right to hate me."
Now get back in your box.
Jacko you missed the point. It's acceptable to use a double negative but it changes it's meaning. By saying his vitriol is not unwarranted means it was warranted. Ie to say you are not unhappy would mean you are happy which is clearly not the case.
Mmanu
quote:
Originally posted by idoru
That is most awesome indeed :haha:
Lews
quote:
Originally posted by Jon_Snow
Jacko you missed the point. It's acceptable to use a double negative but it changes it's meaning. By saying his vitriol is not unwarranted means it was warranted. Ie to say you are not unhappy would mean you are happy which is clearly not the case.
me you're stupid.
Lira
quote:
Originally posted by Jon_Snow
Jacko you missed the point. It's acceptable to use a double negative but it changes it's meaning. By saying his vitriol is not unwarranted means it was warranted. Ie to say you are not unhappy would mean you are happy which is clearly not the case.
