In article <r5idnY8rwqIDObfcRVn-jw@comcast.com>,
"Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net> wrote:

> "Phelps" <phelpscatcher@attbi.com> wrote in message
> newshelpscatcher-400764.18523223082004@netnews.comcast.net...
> > FYI: the legal slang is "deep pockets".
>
> Scuuuuuuuze me... "deep pockets"...

I wasn't correcting you. I was just under the impression that you
appreciated marginally useful trivia.

--
Phelps <http://www.donotremove.net>
"Bury me with all my stuff, because you know that it is mine."
-- Master Shake's Suicide Note, "Aqua Teen Hunger Force"

"Jason G" <jrgusenet@yahoo.REMOVEooTHISooPART.com> wrote in message
news:cgdk4p02eni@drn.newsguy.com...

> Or, if the owner was smart, he would just wave his Articles of
Incorporation at
> you, and you'd be SOL.

Didn't save them, it took years and the government getting in on the game
(dept. of labor) but eventually we got our money. If you can prove an
arms-length arrangement or prove a new company is really just a continuation
of an old company under another name, then those incorporation tricks don't
always work.

"Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:O_GdnTka76sDxLfcRVn-gw@comcast.com...
>
> And, if you could follow a line of reasoning

If you would advance a line of reasoning rather than a collection of blind
biases and myths I might make the effort, but as it is....

>Unfortunately, you
> can't seem to grasp the notion I'm putting forth.

Unless our theoretical game is taking place on a piece of land in the middle
of a swamp beside a nature preserve, then your image of a worthless piece of
land is questionable at best. How many lawyers of the predatory variety
would pass up getting their hands on almost any piece of land in or near a
city? Who knows, in a couple of years it might be the site of a new mall --
real estate is almost always worth acquiring, they aren't making any more of
it. If the owner doesn't have much money, excellent! He signs over the
land in lieu of a judgement, land is almost as good as money in the long
run.

And so on, blah blah, Jeff counter blah blahs whether he really believes
what he's saying or not, blah, we all go to sleep.

"'sentEnce" jeff...

somehow...even with the girth, you're nimble enough to insert foot in mouth.
well done.

"Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:0bGdnW4BiaS44bTcRVn-qA@comcast.com...
> "Insane Ranter" <spam@not.me> wrote in message
> news:xzaWc.5952$0o5.2356@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
> > Your a sue happy nut always looking to strike it rich by suing right and
> > left aren't
>
> "YOU'RE" as in YOU ARE, you non-sentance finishing retarded ADD
sufferer...
>
> --
> Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
> It's not a god complex when you're always right
>
>
>

Of all the words in the english language, sentance vs sentence is the one I
most commonly misspell. I don't know why I misspell that word, except that
I've been doing it for quite some time. It might have to do with a
distinction made in queen's english or something, sentence being a structure
of words, sentance being a jail term, so both spellings might be english,
but I might have simply been mistaken. However, since we're in america,
I'll just take it as "wrong" and move on.

My most common grammatical error is possessive vs contractive use of an
apostrophe where it does not require it, as in "its" vs "it's". "it's" is,
of course, the contraction of "it is", and "its" indicates possesiveness, as
in "its stuff", whatever it refers to in regard to the stuff. I'll often
say "it's stuff", incorrectly.

Since I am willing to admit these two errors as ones that I commonly make,
I'd appreciate it if those specific mistakes weren't used against me.

I will not admit to ever being 100% completely accurate 100% of the time
with regard to grammar and spelling, but I can say this much: I'm a hell of
a lot better at that sort of thing than the vast majority of the tards who
post on usenet.

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right


"defective" <defective@bigwokway.ca> wrote in message
news:cgfkvs$2g4$1@rumours.uwaterloo.ca...
> "'sentEnce" jeff...
>
> somehow...even with the girth, you're nimble enough to insert foot in
mouth.
> well done.
>
> "Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:0bGdnW4BiaS44bTcRVn-qA@comcast.com...
> > "Insane Ranter" <spam@not.me> wrote in message
> > news:xzaWc.5952$0o5.2356@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
> > > Your a sue happy nut always looking to strike it rich by suing right
and
> > > left aren't
> >
> > "YOU'RE" as in YOU ARE, you non-sentance finishing retarded ADD
> sufferer...
> >
> > --
> > Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
> > It's not a god complex when you're always right
> >
> >
> >
>
>

(Jeff Goslin <autockr@comcast.net> uttered
> ...It might have to do with a distinction made in queen's english or
> something, sentence being a structure of words, sentance being a
> jail term, so both spellings might be english, > but I might have
> simply been mistaken. However, since we're in america, I'll just
> take it as "wrong" and move on.

*nod* Yeah, I don't see `sentance' in the dictionary.



> My most common grammatical error is possessive vs contractive use of
> an apostrophe where it does not require it, as in "its" vs "it's".

This is my biggest grammatical pet peeve. It's even more annoying
because over the past year I've occasionally caught myself making it.
Now *that's* infuriating. =)

Canonical reference: http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif




> "it's" is, of course, the contraction of "it is", and "its"
> indicates possesiveness, as in "its stuff", whatever it refers to in
> regard to the stuff. I'll often say "it's stuff", incorrectly.

That's right, because we all know that its stuff is shit, but your
shit is stuff! =)



> Since I am willing to admit these two errors as ones that I commonly
> make, I'd appreciate it if those specific mistakes weren't used
> against me.
>
> I will not admit to ever being 100% completely accurate 100% of the
> time with regard to grammar and spelling, but I can say this much:
> I'm a hell of a lot better at that sort of thing than the vast
> majority of the tards who post on usenet.

Yes, the fact that you are able to form a coherent thought seems to
place you head and shoulders above the vast majority of the
internet-using populace these days. Your ability to construct a
rational argument also helps obviate my strong temptation to flame
you for minute spelling and grammatical errors.


As for myself, I too often fall prey to typos. I usually notice them
not long after I post the article in question, and occasionally
consider cancelling them in an effort to wipe the egg off my face,
but I have qualms about cancelling articles strictly based on content.




Rick
--
key CF8F8A75 / print C5C1 F87D 5056 D2C0 D5CE D58F 970F 04D1 CF8F 8A75
Neither can his mind be thought to be in tune, whose words do jarre;
nor his reason in frame, whose sentence is preposterous.
:Ben Jonson

"Rick Scott" <rick@shadowspar.dyndns.org> wrote in message
news:1ac3.412b8871.d9793@shadowspar...
> (Jeff Goslin <autockr@comcast.net> uttered
> > ...It might have to do with a distinction made in queen's english or
> > something, sentence being a structure of words, sentance being a
> > jail term, so both spellings might be english, > but I might have
> > simply been mistaken. However, since we're in america, I'll just
> > take it as "wrong" and move on.
>
> *nod* Yeah, I don't see `sentance' in the dictionary.
>
>
>
> > My most common grammatical error is possessive vs contractive use of
> > an apostrophe where it does not require it, as in "its" vs "it's".
>
> This is my biggest grammatical pet peeve. It's even more annoying
> because over the past year I've occasionally caught myself making it.
> Now *that's* infuriating. =)
>
> Canonical reference: http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif

There are people who still can not get they're grammar right. Who does we
blame? Is it where they went to skool or their location they, live in?

I can't stand when your is spelled ur.

--
"Don't be misled, bad company corrupts good character."
www.LCTPaintball.com
www.LCTProducts.com


"Rick Scott" <rick@shadowspar.dyndns.org> wrote in message
news:1ac3.412b8871.d9793@shadowspar...
> (Jeff Goslin <autockr@comcast.net> uttered
> > ...It might have to do with a distinction made in queen's english or
> > something, sentence being a structure of words, sentance being a
> > jail term, so both spellings might be english, > but I might have
> > simply been mistaken. However, since we're in america, I'll just
> > take it as "wrong" and move on.
>
> *nod* Yeah, I don't see `sentance' in the dictionary.
>
>
>
> > My most common grammatical error is possessive vs contractive use of
> > an apostrophe where it does not require it, as in "its" vs "it's".
>
> This is my biggest grammatical pet peeve. It's even more annoying
> because over the past year I've occasionally caught myself making it.
> Now *that's* infuriating. =)
>
> Canonical reference: http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif
>
>
>
>
> > "it's" is, of course, the contraction of "it is", and "its"
> > indicates possesiveness, as in "its stuff", whatever it refers to in
> > regard to the stuff. I'll often say "it's stuff", incorrectly.
>
> That's right, because we all know that its stuff is shit, but your
> shit is stuff! =)
>
>
>
> > Since I am willing to admit these two errors as ones that I commonly
> > make, I'd appreciate it if those specific mistakes weren't used
> > against me.
> >
> > I will not admit to ever being 100% completely accurate 100% of the
> > time with regard to grammar and spelling, but I can say this much:
> > I'm a hell of a lot better at that sort of thing than the vast
> > majority of the tards who post on usenet.
>
> Yes, the fact that you are able to form a coherent thought seems to
> place you head and shoulders above the vast majority of the
> internet-using populace these days. Your ability to construct a
> rational argument also helps obviate my strong temptation to flame
> you for minute spelling and grammatical errors.
>
>
> As for myself, I too often fall prey to typos. I usually notice them
> not long after I post the article in question, and occasionally
> consider cancelling them in an effort to wipe the egg off my face,
> but I have qualms about cancelling articles strictly based on content.
>
>
>
>
> Rick
> --
> key CF8F8A75 / print C5C1 F87D 5056 D2C0 D5CE D58F 970F 04D1 CF8F 8A75
> Neither can his mind be thought to be in tune, whose words do jarre;
> nor his reason in frame, whose sentence is preposterous.
> :Ben Jonson