Posters your sick of!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's you're sick of.

I can't stand the Southern SAHM who was a paralegel decades ago, who can't spell.

I don't believe you are qualified to critique spelling errors.

HILARIOUS!!!!!!!!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The "if you couldn't afford them, you shouldn't have had children" posters. And, the "why'd you have children if you're only going to pull them in daycare, have other people raise them and see them only two hours a week" people.

It's hurtful (not to mention elitist).

I was with you 'til you mentioned "only two hours a week." Surely you don't view that as enough time to spend with a child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PS. There HAVE BEEN tons of threads....(although that's a dubious grammatical construct at best)

not "there's been". ugh.

I'm 18:04; we you correcting me? I said 'there's been a ton of threads,' and I think that's grammatically correct.

'There has been tons' is incorrect. 'There have been tons' is correct.

But i said, "there's been a ton" -- isn't that correct?

NO, it's not, because if you "uncontract" the contraction "there's" it is "there is." And "there is been a ton" is not correct, as you, me, and everyone else can recognize.

Jesus Christ on a Broken Stick, you are WRONG lady.

Your comment is so beyond offensive, I can't believe there's any educated "tolerant" person on DCUM who would write such a thing.

[Anonymous]

"What is Grammar police"

[Anonymous]

Penn State defenders.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The "if you couldn't afford them, you shouldn't have had children" posters. And, the "why'd you have children if you're only going to pull them in daycare, have other people raise them and see them only two hours a week" people.

It's hurtful (not to mention elitist).

I was with you 'til you mentioned "only two hours a week." Surely you don't view that as enough time to spend with a child.

2h/w is sarcasm - exaggerating for effect. Any length of time with the kids in a caregivers care (except a specially selected preschool 2 days per week for 2.5 hours that costs more than a year or college) is too long. Anything under 167.89 hours spent with your child attached to you side is too short, and you are clearly not raising your child.

[Anonymous]

Ugh, your side, not you side.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"What is Grammar police"

They call you out on any violation or perceived violation of the rules of grammar or spelling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Although this is anonymous, we all get to "know" each other along the way. Any certain poster you are sick of? I will go first. I am sooooo sick of the dad of 4 month old twins. I honestly know everything about his twins because he responds to every post with like 3 paragraphs of information. Everything from diapers to maternity leave to formula to reflex.... I know more about his kids then some of my real friends kids. Anyone else?

Sick of OP!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That boulevard of broken dreams poster. Everyone had it when is was growing up.

I see what you did there.

[Anonymous]

Sick of people who don't know the difference between less and few.

Sick of the "Nursing Nazi" poster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sick of people who don't know the difference between less and few.

Sick of the "Nursing Nazi" poster.

Hey, there's nothing wrong with nursing your child until he's seven!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sick of people who don't know the difference between less and few.

Sick of the "Nursing Nazi" poster.

Hey, there's nothing wrong with nursing your child until he's seven!

Also people who think they're engaging in a clever rhetorical device by mischaracterizing.

Of course I meant that I am sick of people using "Nazi" as a witty insult. Feel free to go ahead and be sick of posters like me who take the words people use seriously.

[Anonymous]

To the people arguing about has/have and "a ton": "a ton" is a plural, because it is a specific measurement greater than 1. Just as you would say, "There have been 10 posts on this" or "there have been 100 posts on this" or "there have been a million posts on this," you would also say "there have been a ton of posts on this." The only time you would use "has" would be if there had only been a single post on the subject: "there has only been one post."

So, yes, the poster was contracting "there has" to "there's" that that is correct. However, the correct phrase would have been "there have been"; therefore, the correct contraction would have been "there've."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To the people arguing about has/have and "a ton": "a ton" is a plural, because it is a specific measurement greater than 1. Just as you would say, "There have been 10 posts on this" or "there have been 100 posts on this" or "there have been a million posts on this," you would also say "there have been a ton of posts on this." The only time you would use "has" would be if there had only been a single post on the subject: "there has only been one post."

So, yes, the poster was contracting "there has" to "there's" that that is correct. However, the correct phrase would have been "there have been"; therefore, the correct contraction would have been "there've."

*and that