IN!
Spike's Bitches 46: Don't I get a cookie?
[NAFDA] Spike-centric discussion. Lusty, lewd (only occasionally crude), risqué (and frisqué), bawdy (Oh, lawdy!), flirty ('cuz we're purty), raunchy talk inside. Caveat lector.
and the pacifist starts a war. :: sigh ::
My reaction was, "The comma isn't part of the quote. Why would it go in the quote marks?"In this, I am English (or Australian). Alas, I live in America, so I corrected it.
Would a disclaimer that says "I suk @ grammer and puntuation n speling" help?
(oh boy, that last line is going to make a lot of eyes wince)
Seriously, thank you all for the help.
eta: A few more edits. Some format clean up. Bullet points for the 6 things. Remove some comma run on sentences. Removed some parenthetical statements. Hopefully improved, and not compounded the errors.
Um. Is this gal in a wedding dress in her pictures? [link] It sure looks like it. Nothing against divorced folk. But it's an interesting choice for pictures on a dating site, no?
I can't stop myself; it's a sickness.The comma goes inside the quote marks.
Yeah, only if what's in the quotes is not a fragment. Plus, totally changes depending on which style guide is your master.
I only mention it because (this is one of the rare instances where) I think the British version makes more sense. Generally the British version makes more nonsense, which has its appeal.
I'm gonna have to cite a writer, not a writer's guide, (and you know which one I think is the higher authority) and note that John Gardner argues that at a certain level of competence punctuation is a matter of style rather than rule.
I will also point to the historical fact that most matters of grammar (and taste, for that matter) are issues of class rather than logic. That choosing one over the other is a kind of boundary enforcement, not the flower of inevitable, transcendent RIGHTNESS.
I think I found the paint color I want for my hallway going up the stairs: Blue Peacock (Sherwin-Williams)
Um. Is this gal in a wedding dress in her pictures? [link] It sure looks like it. Nothing against divorced folk. But it's an interesting choice for pictures on a dating site, no?
Yes. I looked at the full shot and it is most definitely a wedding gown, w/ train. Bold choice. She should really put up some candids instead of her posed wedding photos. Wierd. And since her profile doesn't specify divorced/widowed/open marriage that would send up a million red flags for me.
But lo, i am picky.
oh no. I had lots of red flags on that one. Is it normal to have that many solo shots of the bride? Maybe she modeled for a bridal magazine. Not going to ask to find out. Too. Many. Red. Flags!
On looking again, she says that she's looking for "anybody" for "friends" so maybe she doesn't realize it's a dating site? Maybe she's just looking for gaming buddies?
oh no. I had lots of red flags on that one. Is it normal to have that many solo shots of the bride? Maybe she modeled for a bridal magazine. Not going to ask to find out. Too. Many. Red. Flags!
I'm trying to parse that theme. Was she marrying in the midst of glorious revolution?