• Anything ‘published’ on the web is viewed as intellectual property and, regardless of whether it displays a copyright symbol or not, is therefore copyrighted by the originator. The only exception to this is if there is a “free and unrestricted reuse” statement associated with the work.

    In order to protect our members and TFL from possible litigation, all members must abide by the following new rules:

    1. Copying and pasting entire articles from another site to TFL is strictly prohibited. The same applies to articles from print or other media, and to posting photographs taken of copyrighted pages or other media.

    2. Copyright law provides for “fair use” of portions of a copyrighted work. You can copy no more than a SINGLE paragraph from the article to your post (3 or 4 sentences at most).

    3. You must provide a link to the article along with the name of website. For example: ww.xxx.yyy/zzz (The Lower Thumbsuck Daily News).

    4. You must provide, in your own words, a brief summary of the article AND your reasons for believing it will be of interest to TFL members. Failure to do so may result in the thread being closed or your post being deleted as a “cut and paste drive by.”

    5. Photographs and other images are also copyrighted. "Hotlinking" of images (so that it appears in your message) from other sites is also prohibited unless you own rights to the image. If you wish to share an image, provide a clickable link to it.

    Posts that do not follow these new guidelines will be altered or deleted by staff. Members who continue to violate this policy may lose their posting privileges at TFL.

    Thank you for your cooperation and your participation in TFL, the leading online forum for firearms enthusiasts.

Asking for Proper English isn't Necessarily...

I just knew I could find your hot button.
Click to expand...

When you get up here just dont take him out drinking, the man is bottomless....

He absorbs...not drinks..but absorbs Jack and Coke...:)

WildwillseehiminanhourAlaska
 
Rich Lucibella said:
By the same logic:

- It's more "efficient" to wear the same clothes for days on end
- It's more "efficient" not to bathe but once a week
- It's more "efficient" to eat with your hands
- It's more "efficient" to use Newspeak and Ebonics
- It's more "efficient" not to obey traffic signs
- It's more "efficient" not to have to worry what the muzzle of your gun sweeps
Click to expand...
Well... efficiency only applies to shortcuts where they make sense... so yes, if someone usurped the idea of efficiency, using it to support some irresponsible behavioral shortcut, the above scenarios could indeed result. But they would be distorting the original meaning of the term.

I understand what you mean though Rich, I just sorta had to say that.

As long as someone appears to make some effort to communicate reasonably, it doesn't matter to me if they leave off an occasional period at the end of a sentence. Just because I rarely make errors doesn't mean that I'm incapable of understanding another person's basic point if their grammar isn't perfect. This is still a far cry from reading a post that is truly confusing, rudimentary or obnoxious in the way it's phrased.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top