Can I Jump on Behind?

[ManDownUnder]

Are not tactility and ductility interelated thus making it about shape too?
Maleability


LOUD NOISES!!!

tactility = to be touched
ductility = able to be drawn/strectched into a wire
Maleability = to be beaten intoa shape

... or am I just being picky - coz if I am I'm in trouble... I'm nosey too.

And picky shouldn't go with nosey - at least not in a public forum

... think I'll leave now...

[Colapop]

tactility = to be touched
ductility = able to be drawn/strectched into a wire
Maleability = to be beaten into a shape

Of course the sublty of relating concepts is lost on the pedantic.

All this talk of touching, and being drawn into things, and being beaten - I'm going to have a cold shower...

I like having a box around

[ManDownUnder]

Of course the sublty of relating concepts is lost on the pedantic.



I like having a box around

unless it's meta subtlety

being subtle about the subtly of the topic at hand... Get ya maleable mind around that one

[Colapop]

unless it's meta subtlety

being subtle about the subtly of the topic at hand... Get ya maleable mind around that one

The topic at hand? Zandalee's request for a ride? Or the the attempt in this case, of trascendence of subtility? Intelligible discourses are spoiled by too much subtility, thus creating division and introducing the obtuse.

[The_Dover]

What the fuck are you cocksmokers wanking on about?

Did some cunt wrap your fish and chips in their old fuckin philosophy essays?

[Colapop]

What the fuck are you cocksmokers wanking on about?

Did some cunt wrap your fish and chips in their old fuckin philosophy essays?

Ahh yes the obtuse construct returns - Thank you Dover for proving my point.

[jrandom]

... trascendence of subtility? Intelligible discourses are spoiled by too much subtility, thus creating division and introducing the obtuse.

I dunno eh.

your 'intelligible discourse' treads close to the fine line of pretentious fluffery that really shouldn't be allowed if it's not spelled correctly.

[Colapop]

I seem to remember a hint at some stage referring my spelling ability to dictionary.com. As has been stated, it is not the actual that should be questioned it is the intent. Pedanticism rears it's ugly head again?

[ManDownUnder]

The topic at hand? Zandalee's request for a ride? Or the the attempt in this case, of trascendence of subtility? Intelligible discourses are spoiled by too much subtility, thus creating division and introducing the obtuse.

Transcendance of subtley.

To reduce the issue at hand and transform to the somewhat vulgar - I can't be arsed reading 100's of pages of stuff to find out what the hell everyone is one about.

[The_Dover]

Or maybe you should just cut to the chase and stop trying to look like a fuckin intellectual twat that uses big words and flowery language to hide the inner retard??

[ManDownUnder]

I dunno eh.

your 'intelligible discourse' treads close to the fine line of pretentious fluffery that really shouldn't be allowed if it's not spelled correctly.

Please keep discussions of fluffers to a minimum - they REALLY destroy my ability to concentrate...

[ManDownUnder]

Or maybe you should just cut to the chase and stop trying to look like a fuckin intellectual twat that uses big words and flowery language to hide the inner retard??

I'm all for Peter Gabriel's approach in "Big Time"

The place where I come from is a small town
They think so small, they use small words
But not me, I'm smarter than that,
I worked it out
I'll be stretching my mouth to let those big words come right out

[Colapop]

Transcendance of subtley.

..... everyone is one about.

Indeed everyone is one. like this thread there is no end.

[The_Dover]

I'm all for Peter Gabriel's approach in "Big Time"

The place where I come from is a small town
They think so small, they use small words
But not me, I'm smarter than that,
I worked it out
I'll be stretching my mouth to let those big words come right out

You listen to Peter Gabriel.

Point proven me thinks.

[jrandom]

Pedanticism rears it's ugly head again?

not really.

it's just that there's something WRONG about pretentiously in-duh-lecktual posts with spelling errors. jarring. unpleasant.

you may note that *I* make a point of dropping out of sloppy-type for my occasional excursions into erudition.