Blah vs r2k - The winner is?

[Zhen]

(17:14:46) ~ (~r2k) "whore"?
(17:14:50) ~ (+Blah) No.
(17:14:50) ~ (+Blah) Hoar.
(17:14:54) ~ (+Blah) Much different from a whore.
(17:14:59) ~ (+Blah) Learn your computer terminology, kthx.
(17:14:59) (@Zhen|Away) Blah
(17:15:01) (@Zhen|Away) advice:
(17:15:06) ~ (+Blah) Beg more?
(17:15:07) ~ (+Blah) kk
(17:15:10) ~ (+Blah) Will do
(17:15:16) (@Zhen|Away) don't try to be better than r2k in grammar
(17:15:18) (@Zhen|Away) kthx
(17:15:24) ~ (+Blah) Unfortunately
(17:15:27) ~ (+Blah) I probably could be.
(17:15:29) ~ (+Blah) =/
(17:15:32) (@Zhen|Away) lol
(17:15:32) (@Zhen|Away) k
(17:15:35) ~ (+Blah) lol
(17:15:36) ~ (+Blah) bai
(17:15:52) ~ (~r2k) lol, i wouldn't be so sure about that..
(17:16:01) ~ (~r2k) but okay, assume what you'd like to..

And so, it starts.

(17:16:10) ~ (+Blah) I*
(17:16:33) ~ (~r2k) that's nitpicking, i deliberately avoid using caps in IRC..
(17:16:59) ~ (+Blah) Why?
(17:16:59) ~ (+Blah) =/
(17:17:02) ~ (~r2k) fyi: the "hoar" you're using is in the wrong context, if that's the word you're trying to use anyway... unless it's some "e-word"
(17:17:03) ~ (+Blah) I'm a spelling whore, thank you =(
(17:17:08) ~ (+Blah) It is some "e-word".
(17:17:21) ~ (+Blah) It has no proper context and can be used in any way that the person using it wishes.
(17:17:28) ~ (~r2k) lol
(17:17:37) ~ (~r2k) right.. basically it's meaningless
(17:17:38) ~ (~r2k) gj
(17:17:39) ~ (+Blah) Bingo
(17:17:51) ~ (+Blah) But people give it meaning due to it's phonetic relation to the word "whore"
(17:18:28) ~ (~r2k) if the meaning's derived from such a "phonetic relation", surely it'd be more logical to use "whore" in the first place..?
(17:18:36) ~ (+Blah) It's more fun to use the word "hoar".
(17:18:38) ~ (+Blah) Enough said.
(17:18:40) ~ (~r2k) and btw, its**
(17:18:45) ~ (~r2k) ;)
(17:18:46) ~ (+Blah) No, the usage was it's*
(17:18:59) ~ (+Blah) Because the phonetic relation is a property of the word "hoar"
(17:19:04) ~ (+Blah) Therefore, under the ownership of said word.
(17:19:07) ~ (~r2k) it's = it is.
(17:19:09) ~ (+Blah) Correct.
(17:19:17) ~ (+Blah) But
(17:19:26) ~ (+Blah) An apostrophe is used in terms of ownership, as shown above.
(17:19:35) (@Zhen|Away) no...
(17:19:37) ~ (~r2k) "it" doesn't have an apostrophe when used in the context of ownership.
(17:19:40) ~ (~r2k) so please, stfu.
(17:19:58) ~ (+Blah) its, it's.
(17:20:02) ~ (+Blah) You so sure?
(17:20:04) (@Zhen|Away) It's its...
(17:20:06) ~ (~r2k) yes, positive.
(17:20:10) ~ (+Blah) For the usage stated above?
(17:20:14) ~ (~r2k) "it's" is strictly "it is"
(17:20:23) ~ (~r2k) yes, i just told you that, didn't I?
(17:20:40) ~ (~r2k) you can go talk to an English professor if you must, but it's not "it's".
(17:21:17) ~ (+Blah) If you say so.
(17:21:36) ~ (~r2k) it's not really a matter of whether I "say so" or not, really
(17:21:53) ~ (~r2k) but ok
(17:21:57) ~ (+Blah) To argue whether or not secularisation is occurring, or has occurred, in our society today one must first define religion itself, then define secularisation- how influential is it now, compared to that of the past, and finally define it's significance.
(17:22:06) ~ (+Blah) it's being used as a term of ownership or property.
(17:22:36) ~ (+Blah) [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
(17:22:52) ~ (~r2k) (19:21:04) ~r2k › you can go talk to an English professor if you must, but it's not "it's".
(17:22:58) ~ (+Blah) I heard
(17:23:09) ~ (+Blah) And I'll go do just that. =D
(17:23:12) ~ (+Blah) brb
(17:23:16) ~ (~r2k) read*, rather, and I'm just reiterating since you don't seem to understand and keep quoting the internet.
(17:23:20) ~ (+Blah) ^_^
(17:25:32) ~ (~r2k) hmm
(17:25:37) (@Zhen|Away) FireCraCkErZ says:
(17:25:38) (@Zhen|Away) I'm having to ask a professor of english on the usage of it's
(17:25:41) (@Zhen|Away) FireCraCkErZ says:
(17:25:41) (@Zhen|Away) Busy
(17:26:05) ~ (~r2k) lol
(17:26:17) (@Zhen|Away) he actually went to ask
(17:26:21) (@Zhen|Away) -_____________________________-
(17:26:32) ~ (~r2k) it's called being stubborn, I think
(17:26:55) ~ (~r2k) perhaps just something females inheritly possess, as they can never be wrong.
(17:27:30) ~ (+Blah) inherently*
(17:27:32) ~ (+Blah) Thank you
(17:27:41) ~ (+Blah) I posted, waiting for a response
(17:27:52) ~ (+Blah) For now, though, let's move to a new topic.
(17:27:54) ~ (+Blah) ^_^
(17:27:57) ~ (~r2k) point in case.

More to come, once he gets the answer.

[Blahness]

r2k wins, with the BAN BUTTON ATTACK!

</notreally>

The final verdict is a TIE, because we BOTH DECIDED THAT. TOPIC. SUCKED!

GG, play again. ^_^

[ThievingSix]

When I looked at the title of this thread I immediately knew that r2k would win; and at the horror of making myself look stupid, I retain that thought.

[cryheart]

Blah pwned by r2k. Good job r2k!

Not boot-licking, it's just that a person's english language is judged mainly by their grammar. Example would be like Blah using the wrong "It's".

Nice battle btw :)

[Citizin]

I think neither of you won, just cause the whole thing in itself had no meaning, somewhat entertaining.

[Blahness]

And people, without even reading the damn thing, assume r2k won, when I already posted the conclusion. Z_Z

Oh well, suckups will be suckups, I guess. ~_^