Locke

[donteatpoop]

For a few moments there I genuinely believed your forum signature was "Last edited by Locke; xx-xx-2014 at xx:xx PM."

[Locke]

Aren't you active, lately. Does this actually warrant a thread unto itself?

If there's a point here, aside from devaluing my own posts, please let me know. As a mod, you're probably aware that most of my posts aren't edited, because I don't think the notation adds to the content (if anything, just the opposite), so if I need to correct even one word in a post, it often makes more sense to delete and repost it. If you can't see the content of my deleted posts, that's essentially what they consist of: that same content, plus or minus one or two words, the occasional corrected misspelling.

I got rid of my signature some time ago, as the quotes I used were no longer relevant, and I had nothing to replace them with. I can believe the honesty of your post, as far as it goes (given my lack of a signature, and some posts that unavoidably stand "edited"). I don't get the point of making it into a thread, though. And letting it stay. I think it's more ethical to recognize a mistake and delete it, instead of leaving it up and having to apologize to those who have read it.

If there's something else going on here, fill me in.

[Vesnic]

Aren't you active, lately. Does this actually warrant a thread unto itself?

If there's a point here, aside from devaluing my own posts, please let me know. As a mod, you're probably aware that most of my posts aren't edited, because I don't think the notation adds to the content (if anything, just the opposite), so if I need to correct even one word in a post, it often makes more sense to delete and repost it. If you can't see the content of my deleted posts, that's essentially what they consist of: that same content, plus or minus one or two words, the occasional corrected misspelling.

I got rid of my signature some time ago, as the quotes I used were no longer relevant, and I had nothing to replace them with. I can believe the honesty of your post, as far as it goes (given my lack of a signature, and some posts that unavoidably stand "edited"). I don't get the point of making it into a thread, though. And letting it stay. I think it's more ethical to recognize a mistake and delete it, instead of leaving it up and having to apologize to those who read it.

If there's something else going on here, fill me in.

Locke, maybe you can think of this thread as an opportunity. You now have an entire virtual demesne in your own name, where you are free to grow elderberries, graze prize-winning yaks or espouse those philosophers who are in fact still relevant to you (Poor Kant! Or was it Locke? Hegel O'Bagel?) You could even draft your own treatise on the Meaning of Hedgehogs. The possibilities are truly endless, and this whole thing has been made possible for you by the Poopyman, who I think realizes your innate humility and the unlikeliness of you ever creating a thread in which to toot your own horn.

Be proud! Be glad! And don't ever worry about being "hackneyed" as you mentioned in my birthday thread. Every now and then, buried deep in the mire of verbal egesta, lie priceless jewels of wit and wisdom. Please don't be discouraged by the fact that I've still got my thigh-high boots on searching for my own gems. You are you, and your baubles might yet rise to the bubbling surface to shine in the sun and do us all proud.

[End Master]

I think it's more ethical to recognize a mistake and delete it, instead of leaving it up and having to apologize to those who have read it.

I still don't understand why you think you'd have to apologize for anything you've written here though. It's not like you're going on sudden drunken Chubbyesque rants or something.

I think every post that I actually remember seeing of yours before you deleted them were fine. I can't remember any that actually insulted anyone either except for one magnificent one directed towards Megaman, and he was being a fucktard at the time anyway.

[Vesnic]

Last edited by Locke; Today at 05:37 AM. Reason: insertion of "have" in the antepenultimate line

I am obliged to disagree with your choice to count a blank line inclusively with total line count for a given document or segment of said document. Thenceforth must result the discrepancy that that which you have deemed to be "antepenultimate" I would in fact designate merely as "penultimate". Your particular choice of usage has never been the protocol in any academic or professional work which I have undertaken. Furthermore, I fear that this error, if upheld by the Committee, could potentially represent an inexcusable failure in your otherwise meticulous dedication to correctness in all its forms.

However, the above sentiments are somewhat mitigated by the fact that you have chosen to substitute "have read" in place of "read". The word "read" was initially problematic for two reasons: firstly, in the ambiguity of its written form and the potential to designate either the present or past tenses utilizing the same orthography, effecting a most lamentable reliance upon context for clarification, and secondly, due to the fact that the rest of the relevant sentence is in fact in the simple present tense, necessitating for the purpose of continuity either a continuation of said time designation or the introduction of a perfect form, preferably the present perfect. The preterite in this case would have been utterly inappropriate, with its inappropriate usage subject to be followed by the immediate and lawful removal of your head from your body.

May God have mercy upon your soul.

[donteatpoop]

The irony of course is that your initial response was in fact edited as well. LOL.

But look a whole thread dedicated to you. And made by the incomparable donteatpoop, no less. Congratulations.

Sorry if this offended you, I thought it would be a funny commentary on your delete/edit frenzies.

[Locke]

...rereading this. Apparently I'm sort of a buzzkill. What a bummer.