Nitwit!Oddment!Blubber!Tweak!
#26
Posted 18 February 2011 - 12:28 AM
#27
Posted 18 February 2011 - 12:32 AM
Spoiler
#28
Posted 18 February 2011 - 02:13 AM
Spoiler
I'm going to attempt to penetrate your mind.
Edited by California, 18 February 2011 - 02:14 AM.
#29
Posted 18 February 2011 - 04:51 AM
You guys really enjoy arguing over stupid shit, huh?
Duh.
#30
Posted 18 February 2011 - 05:09 AM
The simple fact is that you made a distinction between 'fan' and 'fanatic' when they are synonymous... In fact, fan is just a condensed form of fanatic. and yes, I do know how to use a dictionary and look up etymology of words. Something that you nor I argue are apparently capable of doing since you both seem to stupid to realize they are the same thing.You guys really enjoy arguing over stupid shit, huh? And I am very impressed with your keen ability to use a dictionary, Cody. The simple fact is: I know what I meant when I said it.
@argue, slang words that are common use (informal english) is largely listed in dictionaries along with etymology. I posted above the roots of using the term 'fan' to describe a person.
#31
Posted 18 February 2011 - 08:55 PM
#32
Posted 18 February 2011 - 09:16 PM
Fan isn't a separate thing! It's just an abbreviated form of the word 'fanatic'. It's much like when someone says 'I am disappoint." Just because it may be used commonly, it doesn't mean that it's correct. I'm not even suggesting not to use the word 'fan'. It's completely appropriate... but there is no legitimate difference between 'fan' and 'fanatic' and to make a distinction is ignorant.Actually, the connotation of 'fan' has just been reduced to someone who has a positive view of or attitude toward something. But the word 'fanatic' implies a greater intensity. Just because one originates from the other does not mean that they are synonymous.
I'm absolutely done arguing this. *smh*
#33
Posted 18 February 2011 - 11:41 PM
Fan isn't a separate thing! It's just an abbreviated form of the word 'fanatic'. It's much like when someone says 'I am disappoint." Just because it may be used commonly, it doesn't mean that it's correct. I'm not even suggesting not to use the word 'fan'. It's completely appropriate... but there is no legitimate difference between 'fan' and 'fanatic' and to make a distinction is ignorant.
I'm absolutely done arguing this. *smh*
Good thing you are done arguing, because you are entirely wrong.
#34
Posted 18 February 2011 - 11:43 PM
#35
Posted 18 February 2011 - 11:44 PM
I'm going to attempt to penetrate your mind.
Video = Fail
#36
Posted 19 February 2011 - 12:22 AM
I'll try harder next time.Video = Fail
#37
Posted 19 February 2011 - 03:57 AM
I'll try harder next time.
#38
Posted 19 February 2011 - 04:19 AM
I think you are absolutely the most ignorant person I've ever met on codex...Good thing you are done arguing, because you are entirely wrong.
#39
Posted 19 February 2011 - 04:37 AM
I think you are absolutely the most willfully ignorant person I've ever met on codex...
Fixed that for you. iargue occasionally does things like spelling on purpose, and has admitted to arguing points of view which he does not necessarily believe.
#40
Posted 19 February 2011 - 10:45 AM
#41
Posted 19 February 2011 - 10:51 AM
Fixed that for you. iargue occasionally does things like spelling on purpose, and has admitted to arguing points of view which he does not necessarily believe.
But he does love him some Harry Potter. That's a truth. At least... I THINK it is.
#42
Posted 19 February 2011 - 10:53 AM
I went over the summer and it was A.M.A.Z.I.N.G
#43
Posted 19 February 2011 - 11:56 AM
Either way, fan or fanatic I am obsessed with them
#44
Posted 19 February 2011 - 03:07 PM
Yes?
#45
Posted 19 February 2011 - 03:25 PM
Apologies, I confused you and Lollirot with each other.Yes?
A not altogether inexcusable mistake
#46
Posted 20 February 2011 - 12:13 AM
But he does love him some Harry Potter. That's a truth. At least... I THINK it is.
It is.
#47
Posted 20 February 2011 - 10:02 PM
Haha our names are quite close. I would probably have made the same mistake.Apologies, I confused you and Lollirot with each other.
A not altogether inexcusable mistake
#48
Posted 21 February 2011 - 02:04 AM
But that's beside the point. Muggles haven't the imagination to be wizards or witches.
Harry Potter is all so wonderfully formulaic. I especially like the posts above (pg 1 I think) about how Harry should have died, or more thought should have been put into all the supporting character's deaths, etc, etc. JKR is following ancient tragedy/comedy plotlines... there's nothing new in what she's writing except her characterization and the vocab she uses for witches and wizards. Saying it should have ended differently is like saying you like Merry Wives more than Hamlet: they're both masterpieces, just in different modes.
#49
Posted 22 February 2011 - 02:32 PM
Has anyone been to the theme park?
I went over the summer and it was A.M.A.Z.I.N.G
what? where? AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!
#50
Posted 22 February 2011 - 02:35 PM
what? where? AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!
My cousin went to that in Orlando and brought me back a little stuffed pygmy puff and a tshirt
I still was sooo jealous that she got to go for her graduation. I didn't get shit for mine :|
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users


