Popeye's Fried Chicken

[jmcquown]

It's another one of those food reaction videos where people from England
are in the US trying "American" food for the first time:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7rKmT-SAjk

I found it amusing because at one point the young woman said it's like a
KFC and at some point A&W was mentioned. So they obviously know *some*
US fast food chicken joints.

They weren't particularly enamoured of this particular fast food place.

Jill

[GM]

You are a DUMB FUCKING CUNT, Princess Jill...


https://london.eater.com/22807963/popeyes-chicken-uk-restaurant-opening-london

Queue Chicken Mayhem

The crowds came out as Popeyes’s chicken sandwiches made their London debut in Stratford’s Westfield shopping centre this week

by Adam Coghlan@AdamCoghlan
Nov 29, 2021


"This week, hotly anticipated fast food import and U.S. fried chicken juggernaut Popeyes made its London debut at its shiny new flagship restaurant at the Westfield shopping centre in Stratford.

Popeyes’s arrival in London comes — quite hilariously — at the expense of that old timer fried chicken chain KFC, whose site it has taken; it sits opposite a McDonald’s on the ground floor of Westfield’s food court. And because global food brands are mercilessly exploiting opportunities in the post-Brexit, post-lockdown London restaurant dystopia, Popeyes will be neighbours with another American fast food behemoth as Wendy’s nestled in to Westfield when making its U.K. return in August this year.

Rivalling Shake Shack’s debut in 2013 and more recently that of Jollibee in 2018, Popeyes’s Louisianan fried chicken sandwich has been steadily dialling up the hypeometer since first announcing the London opening in March this year — this restaurant apparently the first of 350 sites across the country in the coming years..."

[Bryan Simmons]

On Tuesday, March 21, 2023 at 5:57:02 PM UTC-5, jmcquown wrote:

They didn't order the spicy bone-in chicken, or
red beans and rice. The woman did say that
she loved the biscuit dipped in the Cajun gravy.
People who order boneless, skinless hunks of
breast meat shouldn't have high expectations.

The woman in the video was, as they say, very
*easy on the eyes*.
>
> Jill

--Bryan

[S Viemeister]

On 21/03/2023 22:56, jmcquown wrote:
> It's another one of those food reaction videos where people from England
> are in the US trying "American" food for the first time:
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7rKmT-SAjk
>
> I found it amusing because at one point the young woman said it's like a
> KFC and at some point A&W was mentioned.  So they obviously know *some*
> US fast food chicken joints.
>

There are quite a few KFCs in the UK -

<https://www.kfc.co.uk/>

[itsjoan...@webtv.net]

On Tuesday, March 21, 2023 at 6:09:22 PM UTC-5, GM wrote:
>
> You are a DUMB FUCKING CUNT, Princess Jill...
>

Stop, just stop. There's no sense in this is.

[dsi1]

Indeed there were quite a few KFCs in the UK when we were there. Most of the ones I saw were not really KFCs - they were just shops that sold chicken and called themselves "KFC." One of them was called "Kitchen Fried Chicken." Perhaps things have changed in the decade since we were there. Back then, I thought it was the wild, wild, West, chicken-wise. Unfortunately, I didn't have the presence of mind to eat at Kitchen Fried Chicken.

[jmcquown]

I believe it. Spoiler: They didn't particularly like [this] Popeye's.
It's nice to see a review which is not all THIS IS GREAT! And no, I've
never eaten Popeye's Fried Chicken.

They did do another nice review of a Texas Beef BBQ restaurant that
served smoked ribs and brisket and grilled chicken.

Jill

[Bruce]

On Tue, 21 Mar 2023 18:56:54 -0400, jmcquown <j_mc...@comcast.net>
wrote:

>It's another one of those food reaction videos where people from England
>are in the US trying "American" food for the first time:
>
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7rKmT-SAjk
>
>I found it amusing because at one point the young woman said it's like a
>KFC and at some point A&W was mentioned. So they obviously know *some*
>US fast food chicken joints.

Duh. It's become an international scourge.

[jmcquown]

On 3/21/2023 8:04 PM, itsjoan...@webtv.net wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 21, 2023 at 6:09:22 PM UTC-5, GM wrote:
>>
>> You are a DUMB

(snipped his usual name-calling boring attempts at insults)

>>
> Stop, just stop. There's no sense in this is.

Thanks, Joan. GM keeps trying to jump out of KF's which is the biggest
sign of a LOSER there is, seeking attention. He must be a good friend
with Kuthe. Heh.

Jill

[Bruce]

On Tue, 21 Mar 2023 21:26:33 -0400, jmcquown <j_mc...@comcast.net>
wrote:

I agree. Jill deserves to be criticised on content, not using name
calling and misogynist slur.

[Ed Pawlowski]

I've had the chicken sandwich and it is very good. I've never had other
parts. Chick-Fil-A is a tiny tad better. It is about another 5 miles
further so no, not worth the drive.

[Gary]

On 3/21/2023 7:40 PM, S Viemeister wrote:

Kfc has their unique blend of herbs and spices.
Good stuff but too much is not so good and easy to tire of.

They could really score by offering a version using just salt and
pepper. "Plain and simple." Like everyone's beloved Gramma made.

Hardee's did that - just plain fried chicken and that was very good
chicken. No Hardee's near here now so I don't know if they still make that.

[bruce bowser]

Yeah, I bet folks overseas check into American food places before going there.
KFC has been in Britain for a long time. Many of the soccer stadium thugs go there after games.

[Bruce]

Tortured industry chicken, no doubt. That's hardly "good chicken".

[Bruce]

To KFC specifically? :)

[Sqwertz]

On Tue, 21 Mar 2023 18:56:54 -0400, jmcquown wrote:

> It's another one of those food reaction videos where people from England
> are in the US trying "American" food for the first time:
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7rKmT-SAjk
>
> I found it amusing because at one point the young woman said it's like a
> KFC and at some point A&W was mentioned. So they obviously know *some*
> US fast food chicken joints.

There's 20 Popeye's Fried Chicken restaurants in England, 7 of
them in London Itself. Compared to New Orleans that has 9 of
them.


-sw

[Hank Rogers]

How many in texas?

[jmcquown]

These people were someplace in Miami when they decided to try Popeye's.
The only thing (the guy) seemed to like was the chicken sandwich. They
were otherwise not much impressed. Before they ordered she kept talking
about mashed potatoes (love mashed!) and wondered if they came with
gravy. Rather than ask, she had him order gravy. Got a separate cup of
gravy which they used that to dip the biscuit (they weren't expecting it
to come with a "biscuit").

Jill

[GM]

You SURE do need to find a "hobby", Jill - you seem awfully "bored"...

--
GM

[Hank Rogers]

I'll bet your majesty was extremely amused!


You seem to be tickled shitless now.

[Hank Rogers]

Hell, leave her alone. You chose to be a queer, forger, and general
asshole and she chose to be an old bitter hateful crone. You are
two peas from the same pod. It's all good.

[GM]

Is dat Y-O-U, "Unca Tojo"...!!!???

<chuckle>

--
GM

[Sqwertz]

On Wed, 22 Mar 2023 18:53:54 -0400, jmcquown wrote:

> On 3/22/2023 6:39 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
>> On Tue, 21 Mar 2023 18:56:54 -0400, jmcquown wrote:
>>
>>> It's another one of those food reaction videos where people from England
>>> are in the US trying "American" food for the first time:
>>>
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7rKmT-SAjk
>>>
>>> I found it amusing because at one point the young woman said it's like a
>>> KFC and at some point A&W was mentioned. So they obviously know *some*
>>> US fast food chicken joints.
>>
>> There's 20 Popeye's Fried Chicken restaurants in England, 7 of
>> them in London Itself. Compared to New Orleans that has 9 of
>> them.
>

> These people were someplace in Miami when they decided to try Popeye's.
> The only thing (the guy) seemed to like was the chicken sandwich. They
> were otherwise not much impressed. Before they ordered she kept talking
> about mashed potatoes (love mashed!) and wondered if they came with
> gravy. Rather than ask, she had him order gravy. Got a separate cup of
> gravy which they used that to dip the biscuit (they weren't expecting it
> to come with a "biscuit").

Wow. That sounds like edge-of-your-seat nail-biting excitement!

So I just now watched the first 12 seconds of the video. They say
"We came all the way from London to try Popeye's ...". Yep.
that's all I needed hear - My Point MADE! Her name's Lia? It
should be Lie.


And did they really say, "...it's like the American version of
KFC"??? Sweet. I rest my case. Again.

You have been assimilated into the Moron Youtube culture. Next
you'll be Twittering and TickTalking and calling in sick to work
to watch time-wasting videos all day and night.

-sw

[Gary]

Bruce wrote:> Gary wrote:>> Kfc has their unique blend of herbs and

spices.>> Good stuff but too much is not so good and easy to tire of>>

They could really score by offering a version using just salt and>>
pepper. "Plain and simple." Like everyone's beloved Gramma made.>>
>> Hardee's did that - just plain fried chicken and that was very good >> chicken.> > Tortured industry chicken, no doubt. That's hardly "good
chicken".

Would happy, free range chickens killed and butchered for meat make you
feel better?

[Bruce]

(Your still quoting challenged.)

I don't eat meat.

[Gary]

I noticed that. It must be an occasional Thunderbird flaw.
I always respond to posts the same way (Respond to newsgroup)

> I don't eat meat.

I know you don't eat meat but you always say others are eating tortured
factory chickens.

My question was - how would you feel if others ate only happy chickens?

[GM]

Gary wrote:

> My question was - how would you feel if others ate only happy chickens?

Totally OT, Gary, but here's the "Funny of the Day" ;-)

https://postimg.cc/tZfjmdmh

--
GM

[Gregory Morrow]

In article <tvheb4$14ftt$1...@dont-email.me>, g.ma...@att.net
Gary says...

> My question was - how would you feel if others ate only happy chickens?
>

Chickens die after having sex anyway, well every chicken I've had sex with has.

--
GM

[sticks]

Reminds me of when my redneck pal's son asked about the weather vane on
the barn and why we had a bird on it. I said it was no ordinary bird,
it was a cock. He asked why a cock was depicted on a weather vane. I
told him cause if'n we put a cunt on it, the wind would whistle right
through it.

[Dave Smith]

There are lots of chicken farms around here and I am familiar with the
way they operate. There is no "torture" and no cages. The hatchlings
are released into freshly cleaned barns and have free access to feed and
water. They spend their short lives eating, growing and sleeping.

[Gary]

https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/b0h80o/man_with_big_cock/

[Gregory Morrow]

In article <tvhnbe$156a8$1...@dont-email.me>, wolve...@charter.net says...

GUFFAW!

--
GM

[itsjoan...@webtv.net]

You're not your.

You're spelling challenged.

[GM]

;-)

--
GM

[Bruce]

On Thu, 23 Mar 2023 07:48:52 -0400, Gary <g.ma...@att.net> wrote:

>On 3/23/2023 7:24 AM, Bruce wrote:
>>
>> (Your still quoting challenged.)
>
>I noticed that. It must be an occasional Thunderbird flaw.
>I always respond to posts the same way (Respond to newsgroup)

I believe that, of course, but why does it only happen to you?

>> I don't eat meat.
>
>I know you don't eat meat but you always say others are eating tortured
>factory chickens.
>
>My question was - how would you feel if others ate only happy chickens?

That would be one step better than buying factory chickens. Same with
eggs.

[Bruce]

Thanks, I didn't know that.

>You're spelling challenged.

Shit happens.

[Hank Rogers]

No he's not. The aroma of someone's ass wafted by him, and he went
into a dreamlike state for a short time.

[itsjoan...@webtv.net]

Install Grammarly and/or Microsoft Editor. Grammarly works as an extension
on Chrome, Microsoft Edge, and Firefox, as well as an add-in on Microsoft
Word and Outlook.

[Bruce]

On Thu, 23 Mar 2023 14:36:25 -0700 (PDT), "itsjoan...@webtv.net"

<itsjoan...@webtv.net> wrote:

>On Thursday, March 23, 2023 at 1:56:18 PM UTC-5, Bruce wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 23 Mar 2023 11:47:14 -0700 (PDT), "itsjoan...@webtv.net"
>> <itsjoan...@webtv.net> wrote:
>>
>> >On Thursday, March 23, 2023 at 6:24:13 AM UTC-5, Bruce wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, 23 Mar 2023 07:09:04 -0400, Gary <g.ma...@att.net> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >Would happy, free range chickens killed and butchered for meat make you
>> >> >feel better?
>> >> >
>> >> (Your still quoting challenged.)
>> >>
>> >You're not your.
>> >
>> Thanks, I didn't know that.
>>
>> >You're spelling challenged.
>>
>> Shit happens.
>>
>Install Grammarly and/or Microsoft Editor. Grammarly works as an extension
>on Chrome, Microsoft Edge, and Firefox, as well as an add-in on Microsoft
>Word and Outlook.

The occasional typo doesn't bother me.

[dsi1]

I use the Google grammar checker because I'm too lazy to install a third-party extension. Grammarly is probably a more useful program for lazy-assed people that find writing a chore. My guess is that in the future, typos and grammar errors will be a thing of the past since all text will be checked and edited by AI-bots. A lot of text will be generated by robots. We should enjoy human-generated text while we still can.

[Bruce]

We all don't really need a grammar checker IMO. Mistakes are mainly a
matter of slippiness. Well, there you go, I meant sloppiness. The only
person who can be hard to read is Dave Smith. He probably has sausage
fingers and/or uses a mobile phone.

[dsi1]

I don't have an opinion on this but my little chatbot buddy certainly has. His style is a little milquetoast compared to me though.

"Many people benefit from using grammar checkers when writing. Even the most skilled writers make mistakes, and grammar checkers can help catch errors in spelling, punctuation, grammar, and sentence structure that may be difficult to spot during the writing process.

Grammar checkers can also provide suggestions for alternative phrasing or word choices, which can improve the clarity and coherence of the writing. This can be especially helpful for people who are not native speakers of the language they are writing in.

However, it's important to remember that grammar checkers are not perfect and may not catch every mistake or suggest the best possible revisions. Therefore, it's always a good idea to have someone else review your writing as well, whether that be a colleague, friend, or professional editor."

[dsi1]

I did not write the above, that is "GM" going off his meds again.

[Bruce]

On Thu, 23 Mar 2023 16:30:36 -0700 (PDT), dsi1

Sure, but for Usenet? And especially for RFC? It's a bit like worrying
about having a bad hair day when you're living in a nuthouse.

[Gary]

I sometimes do a spell checker if my spelling doesn't "look right."
Even better sometimes is to copy the word and google it. That will also
show if you're using the right word (that sounds the same).

IMO, the grammar checkers aren't all that useful.
They will show alternatives BUT unless you are good with grammar, you
have no idea if their alt suggestions are correct.

[Cindy Hamilton]

On 2023-03-23, dsi1 <dsi...@hawaiiantel.net> wrote:
> However, it's important to remember that grammar checkers are not
> perfect and may not catch every mistake or suggest the best possible
> revisions. Therefore, it's always a good idea to have someone else
> review your writing as well, whether that be a colleague, friend,
> or professional editor."

I am that "someone else".

I don't have experience with any grammar checker other than the one
built into Microsoft Word. It's a POS that constantly wanted me
to make my writing less sophisticated. It fully earned being shut
off.

And, no: rfc doesn't represent my best efforts at writing. Why
should it? I'm not getting paid to post.

--
Cindy Hamilton

[Bruce]

On Fri, 24 Mar 2023 09:04:19 GMT, Cindy Hamilton
<hami...@invalid.com> wrote:

>On 2023-03-23, dsi1 <dsi...@hawaiiantel.net> wrote:
>> However, it's important to remember that grammar checkers are not
>> perfect and may not catch every mistake or suggest the best possible
>> revisions. Therefore, it's always a good idea to have someone else
>> review your writing as well, whether that be a colleague, friend,
>> or professional editor."
>
>I am that "someone else".
>
>I don't have experience with any grammar checker other than the one
>built into Microsoft Word. It's a POS that constantly wanted me
>to make my writing less sophisticated. It fully earned being shut
>off.

I think one should use the plainest language that allows one to get
one's point across correctly.

One should only use complicated language or "difficult" words if the
content requires it. From that perspective, Cindy's not the greatest
writer. She's too much inclined to show off or try to impress.

[dsi1]

In the future, all posts in rfc will be written by bots. Excepting, of course, posts by GM and his fake posts.

[dsi1]

Your main motivation in life is money? That sucks - terribly.

[bruce bowser]

Cindy should have moved here to NY or Silicon Valley, then.

[fos]

On 2023-03-21, GM <gregorymorr...@gmail.com> wrote:

> You are a DUMB FUCKING CUNT, Princess Jill...

Please show us on the doll where Jill hurt you.

--
f...@sdf.org
SDF Public Access UNIX System - https://sdf.org

[Cindy Hamilton]

No. But there's no motivation here to write as well as I possibly
can. I still write at a higher level than most people here, even
when I'm not trying very hard.

--
Cindy Hamilton

[fos]

On 2023-03-24, Cindy Hamilton <hami...@invalid.com> wrote:
> On 2023-03-24, dsi1 <dsi...@hawaiiantel.net> wrote:

>> On Thursday, March 23, 2023 at 11:04:25?PM UTC-10, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>> On 2023-03-23, dsi1 <dsi...@hawaiiantel.net> wrote:
>>>> However, it's important to remember that grammar checkers are not
>>>> perfect and may not catch every mistake or suggest the best possible
>>>> revisions. Therefore, it's always a good idea to have someone else
>>>> review your writing as well, whether that be a colleague, friend,
>>>> or professional editor."

>>> I am that "someone else".

>>> I don't have experience with any grammar checker other than the one
>>> built into Microsoft Word. It's a POS that constantly wanted me
>>> to make my writing less sophisticated. It fully earned being shut
>>> off.

>>> And, no: rfc doesn't represent my best efforts at writing. Why
>>> should it? I'm not getting paid to post.
>

>> Your main motivation in life is money? That sucks - terribly.

> No. But there's no motivation here to write as well as I possibly
> can. I still write at a higher level than most people here, even
> when I'm not trying very hard.

I slept through English classes all through high school. Had good
teachers, all I had to do was not skip classes to pass so I always
showed up to take a nap. It probably shows. :D

[Cindy Hamilton]

On 2023-03-24, fos <f...@sdf.org> wrote:
>
> I slept through English classes all through high school. Had good
> teachers, all I had to do was not skip classes to pass so I always
> showed up to take a nap. It probably shows. :D

I didn't actually learn that much in my high school English classes.
What really stepped up my game was:

1. reading a ton of really advanced stuff

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvard_Classics

2. learning German

--
Cindy Hamilton

[bruce bowser]

Hey! That's an unfair playing field for the druggies and foreigners. I wonder how many drug users are here.

[%]

Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> I still write at a higher level than most people here, even
> when I'm not trying very hard.
>

Modest too.

[Dave Smith]

Your write ;-)

[Dave Smith]

It's a shame you didn't fail it. Then you could have gone to summer
school and then teach the teacher how to teach it like Bryan and John did.

[Bruce]

On Fri, 24 Mar 2023 04:27:23 -0700 (PDT), dsi1

I'm always afraid that someone will collect some of GM's more poignant
posts and send them to his work. The idea of GM sitting behind a
computer at home with too much time on his hands is a worry.

[Bruce]

Hey, you're using capitals and you're much more readable!

[itsjoan...@webtv.net]

On Friday, March 24, 2023 at 3:40:46 AM UTC-5, Gary wrote:
>
> I sometimes do a spell checker if my spelling doesn't "look right."
> Even better sometimes is to copy the word and google it. That will also
> show if you're using the right word (that sounds the same).
>

If you have a spell checker installed it will underline the misspelled word for
you. No need to "copy the word and google it."

>
> IMO, the grammar checkers aren't all that useful.
> They will show alternatives BUT unless you are good with grammar, you
> have no idea if their alt suggestions are correct.
>

It gives you a chance to better your grammar. But you think they're going to
give you an incorrect alternative just to make you look stupid?

[Bruce]

AI, if you can call it that, can misunderstand completely what you're
trying to say or do and give you ridiculous suggestions. Besides,
there's nothing wrong with your or Gary's grammar.

[itsjoan...@webtv.net]

On Friday, March 24, 2023 at 6:27:27 AM UTC-5, dsi1 wrote:
>
> In the future, all posts in rfc will be written by bots.
>

Can you answer a burning question for me???????? Do you sit in
an elaborate tent with dozens of pillows and Persian rugs scattered
about while wearing a turban, jeweled rings on every finger, while
gazing into your crystal ball?? You're always predicting things "in
the future."

(Burning question produced two choices from Microsoft Editor. I could
have chosen 'a critical issue' or 'a provocative question' but I chose to
stick with 'a burning question.')

[itsjoan...@webtv.net]

I've only experienced one time when I was given a suggestion and I figured
the program had a terrible hiccup. I don't take all suggestions I'm given but
I do find it interesting that I am given a choice of something I might not have
considered.

>
> Besides, there's nothing wrong with your or Gary's grammar.
>

Thank you, I appreciate the compliment.

[Mike Duffy]

On 2023-03-24, Cindy Hamilton wrote:

> I still write at a higher level than most people
> here, even when I'm not trying very hard.

I concur. I too suffer the same gift / curse.

[Bruce]

On Fri, 24 Mar 2023 12:44:07 -0700 (PDT), "itsjoan...@webtv.net"
<itsjoan...@webtv.net> wrote:

>On Friday, March 24, 2023 at 6:27:27 AM UTC-5, dsi1 wrote:
>>
>> In the future, all posts in rfc will be written by bots.
>>
>Can you answer a burning question for me???????? Do you sit in
>an elaborate tent with dozens of pillows and Persian rugs scattered
>about while wearing a turban, jeweled rings on every finger, while
>gazing into your crystal ball?? You're always predicting things "in
>the future."
>

You should feel privileged that dsi1, modern man of the future, is so
often prepared to teach us, dinosaurs from the past, a lesson.

[Bruce]

You should keep your language as simple as possible while still
getting your point across correctly. Never use language that's more
complicated than needed. It makes you the linguistic equivalent of a
nouveau riche.

[itsjoan...@webtv.net]

*SNIGGER*

[GM]

itsjoan...@webtv.net wrote:

> On Friday, March 24, 2023 at 6:27:27 AM UTC-5, dsi1 wrote:
> >
> > In the future, all posts in rfc will be written by bots.
> >
> Can you answer a burning question for me???????? Do you sit in
> an elaborate tent with dozens of pillows and Persian rugs scattered
> about while wearing a turban, jeweled rings on every finger, while
> gazing into your crystal ball?? You're always predicting things "in
> the future."

"The more he talked about honor, the faster we counted the spoons..."

- Ralph Waldo Emerson

--
GM

[Cindy Hamilton]

Heh. Good one.

--
Cindy Hamilton

[Mike Duffy]

On 2023-03-24, Bruce wrote:

> I'm always afraid that someone will collect some
> of GM's more poignant posts and send them to his work.

Maybe you should get an email address and do it yourself.

[dsi1]

Humans think about the future for a variety of reasons. One of the most basic reasons is that the ability to anticipate and plan for the future has been a key factor in the survival and success of our species. Thinking about the future allows us to anticipate potential dangers, opportunities, and challenges, and to make plans to take advantage of or mitigate them.

In addition, thinking about the future is often tied to our goals and aspirations. We may think about what we want to achieve in the future, and how we can work towards those goals. We may also consider the consequences of our current actions on our future selves or others.

Human beings also have a natural curiosity about what is to come. We want to know what the future holds, both for ourselves and for the world around us. This curiosity drives us to explore and investigate the possibilities of the future, and to seek out new knowledge and understanding.

Finally, thinking about the future can also be a source of hope and inspiration. By imagining a better future, we can motivate ourselves to work towards creating that future, and to take action to make positive change in the world.

[Bruce]

I said I was afraid someone will do that. So why would I do it myself?

[dsi1]

Mostly, I have the ability to see how things are connected and how they interact and what it all means. It's a shame that you squander one mankind's greatest ability/gift. I refuse to be caught shortsighted.

Future boi

[itsjoan...@webtv.net]

On Friday, March 24, 2023 at 4:24:30 PM UTC-5, dsi1 wrote:
>
> Humans think about the future for a variety of reasons. One of the most basic reasons is that the ability to anticipate and plan for the future has been a key factor in the survival and success of our species. Thinking about the future allows us to anticipate potential dangers, opportunities, and challenges, and to make plans to take advantage of or mitigate them.
>
> In addition, thinking about the future is often tied to our goals and aspirations. We may think about what we want to achieve in the future, and how we can work towards those goals. We may also consider the consequences of our current actions on our future selves or others.
>
> Human beings also have a natural curiosity about what is to come. We want to know what the future holds, both for ourselves and for the world around us. This curiosity drives us to explore and investigate the possibilities of the future, and to seek out new knowledge and understanding.
>
> Finally, thinking about the future can also be a source of hope and inspiration. By imagining a better future, we can motivate ourselves to work towards creating that future, and to take action to make positive change in the world.
>

https://i.postimg.cc/Hn851gts/Staring.gif

[dsi1]

"Afraid" or "hoping?"

[Bruce]

On Fri, 24 Mar 2023 14:43:00 -0700 (PDT), dsi1
<dsi...@hawaiiantel.net> wrote:

>On Friday, March 24, 2023 at 9:59:59 AM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
>> On Fri, 24 Mar 2023 12:44:07 -0700 (PDT), "itsjoan...@webtv.net"
>> <itsjoan...@webtv.net> wrote:
>>
>> >On Friday, March 24, 2023 at 6:27:27 AM UTC-5, dsi1 wrote:
>> >>
>> >> In the future, all posts in rfc will be written by bots.
>> >>
>> >Can you answer a burning question for me???????? Do you sit in
>> >an elaborate tent with dozens of pillows and Persian rugs scattered
>> >about while wearing a turban, jeweled rings on every finger, while
>> >gazing into your crystal ball?? You're always predicting things "in
>> >the future."
>> >
>> You should feel privileged that dsi1, modern man of the future, is so
>> often prepared to teach us, dinosaurs from the past, a lesson.
>
>Mostly, I have the ability to see how things are connected and how they
>interact and what it all means.

You have very special skills, Mr Asia. You're clearly a superior being
among mere mortals.

[Bruce]

On Fri, 24 Mar 2023 14:44:37 -0700 (PDT), dsi1

Afraid. I don't want Greg to be bored and have even more time on his
hands to post and frog here.

[dsi1]

Clearly, yoose guys are intimidated by people like me. What's to be afraid of? A person with my skills are mostly well-suited to repairing cars, computers, or hearing aids. In the future, people like me won't be needed. We'll be replaced by robots. People like you will still be around - as pets for the robo-masters.

[dsi1]

Good point.

[GM]

And since I'm just now happily retired it is a 'moot' point...

--
GM

[%]

GM wrote:
> And since I'm just now happily retired it is a 'moot' point...
>

Is that why you're always here?

[dsi1]

Full disclosure - I didn't write that. Nobody wrote it - unless you consider a computer to be a somebody. The writing style was way too white which means it was written by a computer or GM.

[GM]

Um, David, I'm afraid that you are "off the beam*" with your above statement...

"*What is the origin of off the beam?

This colloquialism originated about the mid-twentieth century, when aircraft began to be directed
by radio beams...

Its converse is off the beam, meaning “wrong” or “incorrect...”


--
GM

[Bruce]

When you see a parked car, can you tell whether it was parked by a
white person or not?

[dsi1]

Can you tell if a car was owned by a blackfella or a whitefella?

https://www.sbs.com.au/nitv/article/50-ways-you-know-youre-a-blackfella/ch52egh1x

[S Viemeister]

On 24/03/2023 20:04, Bruce wrote:

> You should keep your language as simple as possible while still
> getting your point across correctly. Never use language that's more
> complicated than needed. It makes you the linguistic equivalent of a
> nouveau riche.
>

Back in the 1930s, my father studied journalism at Columbia University.
The lecturers there would have agreed with you - and they would likely
be appalled at the low standard of (much of) today's writing.

[Bruce]

On Fri, 24 Mar 2023 17:07:44 -0700 (PDT), dsi1

No.

See how easy that was? You asked a question and I answered it. You
should try it too! It's liberating. Gets you out of that locked up in
yourself Asian mode.

[Hank Rogers]

Only if the previous owner was asian.

[Bruce]

I can judge that better for Dutch and what I see there more than ever
is typos. I mean in newspapers and on news sites.

[Graham]

On 2023-03-24 6:08 p.m., S Viemeister wrote:
> On 24/03/2023 20:04, Bruce wrote:
>
>> You should keep your language as simple as possible while still
>> getting your point across correctly. Never use language that's more
>> complicated than needed. It makes you the linguistic equivalent of a
>> nouveau riche.
>>
> Back in the 1930s, my father studied journalism at Columbia University.

> The lecturers there would *OF* agreed with you - and they would likely

> be appalled at the low standard of (much of) today's writing.
>

Corrected:-) :-)

[Leonard Blaisdell]

On 2023-03-24, Cindy Hamilton <hami...@invalid.com> wrote:

> I don't have experience with any grammar checker other than the one
> built into Microsoft Word. It's a POS that constantly wanted me
> to make my writing less sophisticated. It fully earned being shut
> off.

You can install a "word checker" for slrn. If the checker thinks the
word is wrong, the word you typed is red when you're finished. The word
is yellow if slrn isn't sure. Then, I google the word if in doubt.
As far as grammar, I yam what I yam.
But, you knew that. I can't wait for ChatGPT to make me sound smart.

[Leonard Blaisdell]

Here's a worthwhile communications quote. I have the book it came out
of. Oops, I ended that last sentence with a preposition!

<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=853394>

[Michael Trew]

I presume that you don't interact with many people under the age of,
roughly, 40. In the past year, I've tried to be more conscientious of
grammar, and it's amazing how many mistakes fly by, right over people's
heads. I'm not just speaking about text, but continuous glaring
mistakes in common language. I have to speculate that language is just
changing -- unfortunately in a less sophisticated manner.

> Corrected:-) :-)

I thought that "of" should be used to connect a noun with another word,
and "have" is physical or abstract possession. Am I looking at this
incorrectly?

[Cindy Hamilton]

So what actions are you taking to bring about a better tomorrow? Does
posting to Usenet count?

--
Cindy Hamilton

[Cindy Hamilton]

On 2023-03-25, Michael Trew <michae...@att.net> wrote:
> On 3/24/2023 21:26, Graham wrote:
>> On 2023-03-24 6:08 p.m., S Viemeister wrote:
>>> On 24/03/2023 20:04, Bruce wrote:
>>>
>>>> You should keep your language as simple as possible while still
>>>> getting your point across correctly. Never use language that's more
>>>> complicated than needed. It makes you the linguistic equivalent of a
>>>> nouveau riche.
>>>>
>>> Back in the 1930s, my father studied journalism at Columbia
>>> University. The lecturers there would *OF* agreed with you - and they
>>> would likely be appalled at the low standard of (much of) today's
>>> writing.
>
> I presume that you don't interact with many people under the age of,
> roughly, 40. In the past year, I've tried to be more conscientious of
> grammar, and it's amazing how many mistakes fly by, right over people's
> heads. I'm not just speaking about text, but continuous glaring
> mistakes in common language. I have to speculate that language is just
> changing -- unfortunately in a less sophisticated manner.
>
>> Corrected:-) :-)

He made a joke by mis-correcting "have" to "of".

> I thought that "of" should be used to connect a noun with another word,
> and "have" is physical or abstract possession. Am I looking at this
> incorrectly?

Not so much incorrectly as imprecisely. "Of" is a preposition;
"have" is a verb.

Here's an elucidation of the parts of speech:
https://www.grammarly.com/blog/parts-of-speech/

It grates on us when people use "of" when "have" is appropriate:
"would of" instead of "would have" for example. That particular
example is a misunderstanding of the contraction "would've".

--
Cindy Hamilton

[Cindy Hamilton]

On 2023-03-25, S Viemeister <firs...@lastname.oc.ku> wrote:

Yeah, well, I don't believe in dumbing things down. If one can't
read William F. Buckley (or his disciple George Will) for his style,
what's the world coming to?

--
Cindy Hamilton

[Cindy Hamilton]

Dear God. Why would I want to do that? I don't even use a spellchecker
in slrn.

--
Cindy Hamilton

[Bruce]

It's not about dumbing down. It's about having this need that you have
to prove yourself. If you were really smart, you wouldn't worry about
it.

[jmcquown]

That reminds me of a joke:

A snooty Northern woman was waiting in an airport. A not-so-snooty
Southern woman seated next to her asked, in a friendly manner, "Where
are you from?" The snooty woman sniffed and replied, "I'm FROM
someplace where we don't end a sentence with a preposition!" The
not-so-snooty woman thought about it for a moment and then said, "Okay,
where are you from, bitch?" :)

Jill