I don’t believe the PPPS, Piers. Your post reads so convincingly that you
must believe it . . . ;-)
Chris
> On 5 Nov 15, at 10:36, Piers Hemy <piers@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I disagree. Having parsed the words carefully, I think what Mike must have
> intended was to compare the impact of curmudgeon-loss with the impact of
> interesting posts, but omitted the colon after "less". It's the only
> grammatical explanation, even though it suggests that Andrew's posts are
> neither pointed nor interesting (they are usually one or the other). Unless,
> as with his use of "impact" as a verb, he was deliberately provoking use.
> But I can't believe that - can you?
>
> Piers
>
> PS NB the deliberately provocative use of conjunction at the beginning of a
> sentence. Twice.
>
> PPS Offset by correct application of apostrophe between "it" and "s"
>
> PPPS ;-)
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|