Racist?

jar quotes: You, my dear aquatically procliviated rodent, then say: Let's take a look at this...the sentence in question is: The issue is one of English usage. The problematical word is "they" in the phrase "they are against the law". To what does the word "they" refer to. In our esteemed riVeRraT's view, this is obviously meant to refer to those actions acted out. And very understandably so! However, it has been my experience that the preponderant portion of English users would - in this particular construct riVeRraT has chosen - apply the word "they" to the words "beliefs" from the phrase "hold those beliefs against them", as that is the closest part of speech applicable - note there are no commas to divide that clause from the other part. However, you could keep within the rules of English (that awful language) and concur with riVeRrat's intent, by skipping backwards, over the "and" and the two commas and attaching the reference to his intended target.Here is an easy way how riVeRrat's sentence should have appeared in the first place: riVeRrat continues later on with: For this I must disagree and lay the blame on you, riVeRrat, for originally making a poor sentence construction that will, in overwhelming preponderance, cause the average reader to misunderstand you. Hey, no biggie. It's just that stupid language, English, which nobody on this planet can use without making mistakes.Cheers, and welcome back. Welcome back all of us.And, of course, thank you Percy for undauntedly working late hours to get this wonderful place back on line.Edited by xongsmith, : No reason given.

---

- xongsmith, 5.7d

Thank you riVeRrat. Given the reaction to this, you would be safer not to assume anything. For example, right now, I am trying to be very careful in choosing my words. I hope I am not misunderstood. I don't agree. jar took it the right way on the face of the sentence and over the years has probably not built up a mechanism to divine your true intent. I certainly haven't. In this case, I did look at the sentence again and came up with a way of interpreting it that would fall into your intent. I lucked out. We cannot read your mind or assume that you meant something that is not the most likely way to read this sentence.In other words, it had become more likely to take the sentence at face value with the implication of your state of mind taken that way, than it was to gerrymander the sentence back into something that presented a point of view on which we could all agree. That is really the more troubling part of this - your creds were already deteriorated enough to allow for that. Now that we know your true intent, it's time to go back and begin to repair those creds.We all would much rather assume posters here are basically nice guys & gals that fundamentally agree on most things. But the internet being what it is, this cannot be assumed. There must be a gradual buildup of trust between everyone.All the best,

---

- xongsmith, 5.7d

Odd?? Percy, i think there is some thing wrong with the attribution code and the reply mechanism!I am honored to be lumped in with Ringo, but I am not Ringo.Artemis Entreri says: But, AE, there are, in fact, RACISTS. So your sticker is NFG.

---

- xongsmith, 5.7d