Just so you're aware, the person who describes themselves as Q (the prick from QAnon) isn't the actual Q. John de Lancie is the actually Q. You foolish mortals
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: Lucifer on December 03, 2008, 03:38:40 AMQuote from: TheoK on December 02, 2008, 05:15:29 PMFor killing towelheads or vote for the BNP, for example. nah - i'd rather shag sheep. they look quite fetching in jackboots, too.Meh.I prefer them in hawt silk with braids and bows.
Quote from: TheoK on December 02, 2008, 05:15:29 PMFor killing towelheads or vote for the BNP, for example. nah - i'd rather shag sheep. they look quite fetching in jackboots, too.
For killing towelheads or vote for the BNP, for example.
The two are not necessarily mutually excluding.
The Swedish word would be "exkluderande" and the German "exkludierend", so it's merely your language that turns out to be illogical once again.
Quote from: TheoK on December 04, 2008, 03:03:08 PMThe Swedish word would be "exkluderande" and the German "exkludierend", so it's merely your language that turns out to be illogical once again.But if you wanted to preserve our fine language, you'd use "uteslutande" instead.
Quote from: TheoK on December 04, 2008, 03:03:08 PMThe Swedish word would be "exkluderande" and the German "exkludierend", so it's merely your language that turns out to be illogical once again.why? it's partly a romance language, so why should it follow germanic language rules at all times?anyway, i wasn't writing swedish or german, dur, and neither were you.
Quote from: odeon on December 04, 2008, 03:20:51 PMQuote from: TheoK on December 04, 2008, 03:03:08 PMThe Swedish word would be "exkluderande" and the German "exkludierend", so it's merely your language that turns out to be illogical once again.But if you wanted to preserve our fine language, you'd use "uteslutande" instead.I do normally, and the Germans usually don't use "exkludierend" either, but I presented a point.