ain't\ˈānt\
1 : am not : are not : is not
2 : have not : has not
3 : do not : does not : did not — used in some varieties of Black English
Origin: contraction of are not.
First use: 1749
Usage: Although widely disapproved as nonstandard and more common in the habitual speech of the less educated, ain't in senses 1 and 2 is flourishing in American English. It is used in both speech and writing to catch attention and to gain emphasis <the wackiness of movies, once so deliciously amusing, ain't funny anymore — Richard Schickel> <I am telling you—there ain't going to be any blackmail — R. M. Nixon>. It is used especially in journalistic prose as part of a consistently informal style <the creative process ain't easy — Mike Royko>. This informal ain't is commonly distinguished from habitual ain't by its frequent occurrence in fixed constructions and phrases <well—class it ain't — Cleveland Amory> <for money? say it ain't so, Jimmy! — Andy Rooney> <you ain't seen nothing yet> <that ain't hay> <two out of three ain't bad> <if it ain't broke, don't fix it>. In fiction ain't is used for purposes of characterization; in familiar correspondence it tends to be the mark of a warm personal friendship. It is also used for metrical reasons in popular songs <Ain't She Sweet> <It Ain't Necessarily So>. Our evidence shows British use to be much the same as American.
It isn't any of my concern, if you wish to be considered 'nonstandard' and / or 'less educated'.
Yer callin my bluff? How many violations have I accumulated? And are you keeping track of everyone's transgressions? Plus who said yer rules were the rules fer this site? Hmmm?
Are they globalists trying to take over?
Who are the vhatc? Are they trying to take our rights away...take the guns away?
You didn't answer my question about the number of violations I have so I'm issuing 10 demerits to you:deliberate avoidance
It's for the good of the planet. We must balance the needs of the individual against the needs of the planet. You lose. Now move into the closest city center where we have a 200 sq ft cell(apartment) for you. And you only need a bike.
Your first question uses an -ist suffix (from the Hellenic [Greek] istēs), incompatible with a New Era of Enlightenment, and for that reason, unanswerable. Please rephrase your question without using -ists or -isms.
The VHATC-L2 (please use the proper form) is an acronym for, 'Very Highly Advanced Technological Civilisation in the galaxy L2' , in our Local Group.
Incorrect. They are trying to help you (and all the other life forms on Planet Earth). So-called 'rights', are earned through responsible behaviour. Live by a gun, die by a gun.
I do not keep account of an individual's violations, and / or Ethical conduct. You will need to query the VHATC-L2, should you receive that opportunity.
By whose authority are you issuing these "demerits"?
Hey chucklehead, it is people like you who are contributing to the destruction of this Planet Earth. You are selfish, stubborn and greedy. Conform with this New Era of Enlightenment, or forfeit Rule #1. No human (Homo sapiens sapiens), has the 'right' to deprive any other life form, that we share this planet with, their 'right' of existence.
You have a 'right' to die. No human can deprive you of that 'right'.
Incorrect. I an not for a "New World Order" [please note the capitals], in any sense of this phrase.
I am for, "A New Era of Enlightenment."
A "New World Order", does nothing to 'save the planet', There is no 'order' [to this], in any "New World Order."
True. Usually, name-calling [please note the hyphen], would be in violation of the Rules. However, in this circumstance, I honestly believe that your statement that, "It's for the good of the planet. We must balance the needs of the individual against the needs of the planet. You lose.", is well within the definition of 'chucklehead', or stupid. If we continue to blindly satiate our so-called 'needs' (for many, these are excessively greedy and wasteful), ahead of the planet, then we will destroy the Earth's biosphere in short order, and we all lose. Ergo, the needs of the planet, should always be preeminent, ahead of the needs of the individual.
Please try to conceive that the Rules, are no more 'made up', than any of our current legislation is.
I was provided with assistance in developing the Rules, by the VHATC-L2 (who are very real).
Are 'IIN' answers representative of the views of the wider public?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
ain't\ˈānt\
1 : am not : are not : is not
2 : have not : has not
3 : do not : does not : did not — used in some varieties of Black English
Origin: contraction of are not.
First use: 1749
Usage: Although widely disapproved as nonstandard and more common in the habitual speech of the less educated, ain't in senses 1 and 2 is flourishing in American English. It is used in both speech and writing to catch attention and to gain emphasis <the wackiness of movies, once so deliciously amusing, ain't funny anymore — Richard Schickel> <I am telling you—there ain't going to be any blackmail — R. M. Nixon>. It is used especially in journalistic prose as part of a consistently informal style <the creative process ain't easy — Mike Royko>. This informal ain't is commonly distinguished from habitual ain't by its frequent occurrence in fixed constructions and phrases <well—class it ain't — Cleveland Amory> <for money? say it ain't so, Jimmy! — Andy Rooney> <you ain't seen nothing yet> <that ain't hay> <two out of three ain't bad> <if it ain't broke, don't fix it>. In fiction ain't is used for purposes of characterization; in familiar correspondence it tends to be the mark of a warm personal friendship. It is also used for metrical reasons in popular songs <Ain't She Sweet> <It Ain't Necessarily So>. Our evidence shows British use to be much the same as American.
It isn't any of my concern, if you wish to be considered 'nonstandard' and / or 'less educated'.
Where are your rules?
--
robbieforgotpw
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
Yer callin my bluff? How many violations have I accumulated? And are you keeping track of everyone's transgressions? Plus who said yer rules were the rules fer this site? Hmmm?
--
suckonthis9
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-1
-1
Violation.
Please see Rule #10.
Transgression; Contempt
Please be honest with yourself and others. [There are a few exceptions to this, poker is one of them.]
The Rules are not just for this website. They are for everyone around the world.
The VHATC-L2 said so. You can ask them, if you get the chance.
--
robbieforgotpw
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
Are they globalists trying to take over?
Who are the vhatc? Are they trying to take our rights away...take the guns away?
You didn't answer my question about the number of violations I have so I'm issuing 10 demerits to you:deliberate avoidance
It's for the good of the planet. We must balance the needs of the individual against the needs of the planet. You lose. Now move into the closest city center where we have a 200 sq ft cell(apartment) for you. And you only need a bike.
--
suckonthis9
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-1
-1
Your first question uses an -ist suffix (from the Hellenic [Greek] istēs), incompatible with a New Era of Enlightenment, and for that reason, unanswerable. Please rephrase your question without using -ists or -isms.
The VHATC-L2 (please use the proper form) is an acronym for, 'Very Highly Advanced Technological Civilisation in the galaxy L2' , in our Local Group.
Incorrect. They are trying to help you (and all the other life forms on Planet Earth). So-called 'rights', are earned through responsible behaviour. Live by a gun, die by a gun.
I do not keep account of an individual's violations, and / or Ethical conduct. You will need to query the VHATC-L2, should you receive that opportunity.
By whose authority are you issuing these "demerits"?
Hey chucklehead, it is people like you who are contributing to the destruction of this Planet Earth. You are selfish, stubborn and greedy. Conform with this New Era of Enlightenment, or forfeit Rule #1. No human (Homo sapiens sapiens), has the 'right' to deprive any other life form, that we share this planet with, their 'right' of existence.
You have a 'right' to die. No human can deprive you of that 'right'.
--
noid
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
-
robbieforgotpw
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
-
robbieforgotpw
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
You misspelled civilization. It has a z, not an s.
Are you for the new world order of global poverty in the name of saving the planet?
--
suckonthis9
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
Incorrect. I an not for a "New World Order" [please note the capitals], in any sense of this phrase.
I am for, "A New Era of Enlightenment."
A "New World Order", does nothing to 'save the planet', There is no 'order' [to this], in any "New World Order."
Isn't name calling against one of your made up rules? About being polite?
Beep, warning john spartan, ten demerits for insulting another life form.
--
suckonthis9
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
True. Usually, name-calling [please note the hyphen], would be in violation of the Rules. However, in this circumstance, I honestly believe that your statement that, "It's for the good of the planet. We must balance the needs of the individual against the needs of the planet. You lose.", is well within the definition of 'chucklehead', or stupid. If we continue to blindly satiate our so-called 'needs' (for many, these are excessively greedy and wasteful), ahead of the planet, then we will destroy the Earth's biosphere in short order, and we all lose. Ergo, the needs of the planet, should always be preeminent, ahead of the needs of the individual.
Please try to conceive that the Rules, are no more 'made up', than any of our current legislation is.
I was provided with assistance in developing the Rules, by the VHATC-L2 (who are very real).