That is not rhetorical! Where do you stand???
Jan 16, 2019 22:49:48 #
dongreen76 wrote:
What did I give you as a definition of CONFEDERATE... (show quote)
Lol, this is priceless, Don. Hey Don, where were you educated? I hope it was free. If you had to pay for it, you should hire an attorney and file charges against them for unarmed robbery.
"Prefixes”are key morphemes in English vocabulary that begin words. The prefix con-, which means “with” or “thoroughly,” appears in numerous English vocabulary words, for example: connect, consensus, and conclude. An easy way to remember that the prefix con means “with” is through the word connect, or join “with.”
http://membean.com/wrotds/con-with
Jan 16, 2019 23:39:12 #
Con is with in Spanish.
The Critical Critic wrote:
Lol, this is priceless, Don. Hey Don, where were y... (show quote)
Jan 16, 2019 23:48:34 #
Jan 17, 2019 00:12:03 #
hablas Espanol? (sp) not a Spanish keyboard.
The Critical Critic wrote:
Sí
Jan 17, 2019 00:28:58 #
ron vrooman wrote:
hablas Espanol? (sp) not a Spanish keyboard.
Not a lick, Ron. But with google t***slate, I can read and write in over a hundred languages.
Jan 17, 2019 00:42:52 #
Never used it. I'll try it.
The Critical Critic wrote:
Not a lick, Ron. But with google t***slate, I can read and write in over a hundred languages.
Jan 17, 2019 00:44:29 #
Comment
Loc: California
ron vrooman wrote:
thank you
Dah, dah, dah, dah and on it goes to infinity. Stupid sheet!
Jan 17, 2019 11:56:53 #
Please clarify. Is that a yes or no.
Comment wrote:
Dah, dah, dah, dah and on it goes to infinity. Stupid sheet!
Jan 23, 2019 09:20:08 #
Over a 1000 people and persons viewed the post and damned few could stand and deliver a YES. No one was brave enough to say no. Fvcking cowards or too timid.
Jan 23, 2019 10:05:41 #
ron vrooman wrote:
Over a 1000 people and persons viewed the post and damned few could stand and deliver a YES. No one was brave enough to say no. Fvcking cowards or too timid.
Not sure if you realize this or not, but, that number is not indicative of separate individuals. Each and every time you click on the topic, it is considered a “view” - you and I have probably contributed a hundred views, each. Add that to the number of views that were contributed by others that did stand and deliver... still, probably doesn’t total over a thousand, but then you can add the ones that chose not to respond.
Jan 23, 2019 10:22:47 #
The Critical Critic wrote:
Lol, this is priceless, Don. Hey Don, where were y... (show quote)
"YOU PEOPLE" are supremely intelligent.
Jan 23, 2019 10:38:15 #
Better said, over a 1000 views by people and persons. Many view and are not respondents. Just Looky Lous
The Critical Critic wrote:
Not sure if you realize this or not, but, that number is not indicative of separate individuals. Each and every time you click on the topic, it is considered a “view” - you and I have probably contributed a hundred views, each. Add that to the number of views that were contributed by others that did stand and deliver... still, probably doesn’t total over a thousand, but then you can add the ones that chose not to respond.
Jan 23, 2019 10:58:19 #
[quote=ron vrooman]Better said, over a 1000 views by people and persons. Many view and are not respondents. Just Look
To reiterate,the number of post are the number of replyers.Oh boy ! I gotta refute that !, that ain't right.
The number of views, mmmm ! that's interesting-# of post are included in # of views,it would be redundant to separate the two stats -it stands to reason that if they replied to it they would have to have viewed it.
To reiterate,the number of post are the number of replyers.Oh boy ! I gotta refute that !, that ain't right.
The number of views, mmmm ! that's interesting-# of post are included in # of views,it would be redundant to separate the two stats -it stands to reason that if they replied to it they would have to have viewed it.
Jan 23, 2019 11:04:26 #
insufficient intelligence to enter into a conversation among adults.
[quote=dongreen76]
[quote=dongreen76]
ron vrooman wrote:
Better said, over a 1000 views by people and persons. Many view and are not respondents. Just Look
To reiterate,the number of post are the number of replyers.Oh boy ! I gotta refute that !, that ain't right.
The number of views, mmmm ! that's interesting-# of post are included in # of views,it would be redundant to separate the two stats -it stands to reason that if they replied to it they would have to have viewed it.
To reiterate,the number of post are the number of replyers.Oh boy ! I gotta refute that !, that ain't right.
The number of views, mmmm ! that's interesting-# of post are included in # of views,it would be redundant to separate the two stats -it stands to reason that if they replied to it they would have to have viewed it.
Jan 23, 2019 13:05:17 #
ron vrooman wrote:
insufficient intelligence to enter into a conversation among adults.
When one is a member of the "MASTUH` `RACE" one should have the tact,and the courtesy,and one should be secure in one's MASTUHRY`, so that one should never exhibit contempt,nor disdain by making statements - like that above - that flaunts one's superiority over one's subordinates.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.