The Official ZBB Quote Thread

[Xephyr]

Yes, see? One tiny little harmless misreading happens and before you know it we're all at each other with knives and clubs.

[Ser]

One tiny little harmless misreading happens and before you know it we're all at each other with knives and clubs.

[clawgrip]

That should be the ZBB motto.

[finlay]

What I am saying is that the quote was mocking finlay and lacked any context (including the half-joking thing).

Take it up with Zontas.

He responded by showing his annoyance. You then appeared to be confused about why he was annoyed: "You don't like that people talk about you? Where does that come from?" I'm telling you why I perceived him to be annoyed. Whether or not you want to beg his forgiveness is your choice.

Bullshit. Finlay never said that he didn't like people mocking him... he said he didn't like people "having conversations about [him]". The phrase "have conversations about" carries absolutely zero negative connotations whatso-fucking-ever. However, as I said in a previous post, I assume good faith on Finlay's part, that he's not actually proscribing all conversations about him, and that this is all a misunderstanding.

pretty much. i get a bit paranoid sometimes i guess. don't worry about it. i haven't been on the irc channel for many years so i tend to assume that all you do on there is mock other people, usually eddy, but that may well be just from the little that filters back here.

[Drydic]

<Legion> sometimes the people in this chat room are ents
<Legion> it's like
<Legion> <cev> hey vlad
<Legion> two days later
<Legion> <vlad> yes?
<Legion> two days later
<Legion> <cev> uh, I don't remember
<Legion> two days later
<Legion> <vlad> ok, cool

[----]

Where is this chatroom, anyway?

[Ser]

Where is this chatroom, anyway?

#isharia on irc.sorcery.net.

[Legion]

SHHH!

Dammit we got enough stupid people, no need to put up ads.

[Torco]

Interesting chart for Okinawan conjugation. It reminds me of Japanese

GEE I WONDER HOW THAT COULD BE

[Qwynegold]

also 42 is slang for gay.

Because gays are the meaning of life etc. Right?

You are not the answer to the unposed question, Astraios

[dhok]

Come enjoy fine intellectual discussion of fascism and other great ideas at #redacted at Sorcery, too.

[Drydic]

*stink eyes Dhok*

[linguoboy]

Does anybody like John Barrowman? Other than gay people who are really, really keen on being seen to be gay. The whole point about Barrowman seems to be that, because gay people are stupid and identical to each other, they'll all love Barrowman because he's pretty and camp (in a swaggering way) and hence one of them... and that straight people will like him because he's 'gay' in a self-demeaning way and non-threatening and hence 'a national treasure', like a cute little endangered species of rabbit or something.

[tiramisu]

<Cev> a b g d
<Cev> abugida
<Legion> yes
<Cev> I never realized that

[Herr Dunkel]

Faroese is to Old Norse what Mandarin is to Classical Chinese. You write it the same way but boy oh boy do you not pronounce it so.

[Ser]

But that's not true, Classical Chinese is always read the same as Mandarin (or Cantonese in Hong Kong).

[Drydic]

There is a philistine in our midst.

[Ser]

All Many (most?) non-human mammals fuck for dominance.

Correction.

That's false. Have you guys ever heard of bottoming?

No, please tell me all about it.

In men, it's about this moment in life when you discover why God put nerve receptors by the prostate.
And you thank Him the design.

10/10 would laugh again

[Hallow XIII]

Waidasecond. Wasn't it Rusanov who was responsible for the first post in that chain?

[Ser]

Yes, and now I have corrected it.

[finlay]

You're being a dick. Stop it.

ahem

[Ser]

<Serafin|3> I'd still like to know why Latinists often punctuate Latin as if it were German though
<Serafin|3> Et vidit Deus, quod esset bonum.
<Cev> why is esset in subjunctive there?
<Zontas> There might not be a god.
<Cev> Ah
<Cev> Yes, that must be it.
<Cev> "And God saw that it was good, assuming of course that there even is a God, which is in itself something of a stretch to assume, but let's just run with that for the next 1300 pages, just for the sake of argument, k?" <-- accurate translation of Genesis 1

[Aurora Rossa]

I thought that Latin and the Romance languages used the subjunctive mood for dependent clauses, hence its use in the Latin for "that it was good".

[Ser]

I thought that Latin and the Romance languages used the subjunctive mood for dependent clauses, hence its use in the Latin for "that it was good".

Dīcere quod is followed by the indicative. This goes for verbs of communication/speech acts in general (say, declare, swear...). That's why it's interesting/weird to see it followed by the subjunctive here.

[hwhatting]

I thought that Latin and the Romance languages used the subjunctive mood for dependent clauses, hence its use in the Latin for "that it was good".

Dīcere quod is followed by the indicative. This goes for verbs of communication/speech acts in general (say, declare, swear...). That's why it's interesting/weird to see it followed by the subjunctive here.

Well, firstly, it's videre quod; secondly, in Classical Latin, this would have been an AcI ("vidit Deus (id) bonum esse"). In Clasical Latin only certain object sentences containing concrete facts could be formed using quod, that's why this sentence would not have been correct in Classical Latin. But at the time of the Vulgate, the AcI was already in retreat, and it seems the usual rules of subjunctive use in dependent sentences (indicative for objective facts, subjunctive for subjective judgements) were applied to object sentences with quod.