Just one wish

[ramzey]

no more trolls like Krusty or Ik3 on BB

PLEASE

[Krusty]

I have not ever "trolled" on this forum. "Trolling" is not simply pointing out why your bad ideas won't work, or something like that. Trolling is what you just did, posting a post for no other reason than to anger people in an attempt to get attention on the forums (which, by the way, is against the rules).

I'm a logical minded person. I like some of the ideas that have come up. However, there are a LOT of ideas that just won't work for logical reasons, and I point that out.

I don't like you. I don't hate you. I just point out the flaws in your ideas. It's nothing personal, deal with it or don't. But if I present a flaw, find a way around that flaw if you really want the idea implemented in this game.

That's all I'm going to say on the matter. Like I just typed. Deal with it, or don't.

EDIT: One thing I think I should clarify: "You" doesn't mean you. It means you all. Whoever. I don't care who ya are, but if I pointd out a flaw it was for a reason

[TalonX]

Whoever should have been "whomever".

I hate trollers.

[Krusty]

Originally posted by TalonX
Whoever should have been "whomever".

I hate trollers.

So do I. Note, however, that "Whoever." was in its own sentence. It is outside the bounds of proper grammar, and as such it is not correct to say "it should be whomever" -- because it is not the direct object and it is not the indirect object. It is just a single word with no verbs and a period.

[hubsonfire]

Originally posted by Krusty
So do I. Note, however, that "Whoever." was in its own sentence. It is outside the bounds of proper grammar, and as such it is not correct to say "it should be whomever" -- because it is not the direct object and it is not the indirect object. It is just a single word with no verbs and a period.

"Whoever." isn't its own sentence; it's a fragment, and as such is incorrect.

[Krusty]

Exactly!

That's my point

But it is also incorrect to try and apply direct/indirect object status on it by talon saying I should have said "whomever" -- which is also incorrect (and 2 wrongs don't make a right!)

[hubsonfire]

Oh, well, I'll agree with that. Have we bored this thread to death yet?

[Krusty]

I hope so. Can I play the part of "Bones" and say: "It's dead, Jim"

(or, maybe instead "Jim.... It's dead!"?)

[TalonX]

Originally posted by Krusty
Exactly!

That's my point

But it is also incorrect to try and apply direct/indirect object status on it by talon saying I should have said "whomever" -- which is also incorrect (and 2 wrongs don't make a right!)

As always, I am grammatically correct.  In the context of your useage only the objective case would be appropriate.       The balance of the sentence could only make "whomever" the object.

Where is the flying in this discussion?