-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thursday 03 April 2003 9:54 am, David Colee wrote: > Further problem that causes "heartburn" - while I'm sure it wasn't meant to > violate any rules, the reply below also used profanity (I'm not > complaining, just pointing out the pervasiveness of it in today's language! > I'm regularly much worse, when not actively practicing restraint!), which > is a "No No" for amateurs.
heh heh heh -- yup, I actually considered saying "darn near", but in truth, is it really "less profane" since the intent of the comment isn't changed by a truncating the "m" to an "r"? OTOH, considering the "pervasivenes" of certain words and their "supposed" history, here are a couple of links I'm sure WILL trigger someone's paranoia filter: [to set the stage, this was sent in response to a joke about the supposed historical source of a common name for feces] On Wednesday 02 April 2003 10:02 am, Karl Eriksen wrote: Subject: is this true? > Today's vocabulary word: Manure > In the 16th and 17th centuries, everything was transported by ship.... Is this true? Not according to Snopes: http://www.snopes.com/language/acronyms/shit.htm and for a close cousin, see: http://www.snopes.com/language/acronyms/fuck.htm [but a fun read all the same. :) ] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: http://osnut.homelinux.net/TomEmerson.asc iD8DBQE+jH1nV/YHUqq2SwsRAtZPAKCskGa0BbUSnyoWH9Np8m4q+JIdBgCgwVsS si1uUAMig0VKoo6pvveTbYU= =VybY -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
