• (cs) in reply to Gert
    Gert:
    It's a common knowledge that source code can only be viewed by developers
    omfg you are killing me. Those comments left in a template file - just funny. not professional, no, but funny. Would a little proper spelling kill the designer though? I mean really...

    I just love this little box around my comments too, so fun.

  • Captain Over (unregistered) in reply to tendrel

    "The Red Zone is for immediate loading and unloading only; there is no parking in the White Zone."

    "Get me Hamm on five, hold the Mayo"

    "Looks like I picked the wrong week to give up horse tranquilizers"

    "Surely you can't be serious?!" "I am serious, and don't call me Shirley."

    /Airplane... good times...

  • (cs)

    I wonder what the site's bandwidth bills are like.

  • Sean (unregistered) in reply to Alice
    Alice:
    DP:
    forfend \for-FEND\, transitive verb: 1. a. (Archaic) To prohibit; to forbid. b. To ward off; to prevent; to avert. 2. To defend; to protect; to preserve.

    ahahahahahahahahah

    Is that guy from the 13th century?

    Wow, if you really didn't know that idiom and needed to look it up, you really have no grounds making fun of someone.

    captcha: darwin? that's telling you something.

    Everyone has learned words that others have not, but when a word is archaic, that means, generally speaking, it's out of use and you can expect only a certain fraction of the people you meet to know the meaning of the word (or its existence for that matter).

  • Reader (unregistered) in reply to Sean
    Sean:
    Everyone has learned words that others have not, but when a word is archaic, that means, generally speaking, it's out of use and you can expect only a certain fraction of the people you meet to know the meaning of the word (or its existence for that matter).
    Spot on.
  • Matthew Watson (unregistered) in reply to Reader

    The term "heaven forfend", however, is a fairly common idiom. I see it used quite a lot. One has only to google for the term to see how common it actually is.

  • nini (unregistered) in reply to Matthew Watson
    Matthew Watson:
    The term "heaven forfend", however, is a fairly common idiom. I see it used quite a lot. One has only to google for the term to see how common it actually is.

    Out of curiosity, are you from the UK (or anywhere outside of North America)? I've only heard people say "heaven forbid" before.

  • Rhialto (unregistered) in reply to Jim Bob
    Jim Bob:
    The Frinton Mafia:
    DP:
    forfend \for-FEND\, transitive verb: 1. a. (Archaic) To prohibit; to forbid. b. To ward off; to prevent; to avert. 2. To defend; to protect; to preserve.

    ahahahahahahahahah

    Is that guy from the 13th century?

    Nah, he's just literate. That's what we call it when someone is able to use language to communicate. In this case, by using 'forfend' rather than 'forbid', he's creating a humorous, tongue-in-cheek effect that offsets the otherwise negative tone of his comment.

    See? That's not so hard, is it? Let's try another example:

    "Heaven forfend you choose to educate yourself rather than yipping at the ankles of your betters."

    you're a fucking faggot

    What? A bundle of sticks?

    Oh, by the way, you forgot the full stop at the end of your purported sentence.

  • Hatshepsut (unregistered) in reply to Sean
    Sean:
    Alice:
    DP:
    forfend \for-FEND\, transitive verb: 1. a. (Archaic) To prohibit; to forbid. b. To ward off; to prevent; to avert. 2. To defend; to protect; to preserve.

    ahahahahahahahahah

    Is that guy from the 13th century?

    Wow, if you really didn't know that idiom and needed to look it up, you really have no grounds making fun of someone.

    captcha: darwin? that's telling you something.

    Everyone has learned words that others have not, but when a word is archaic, that means, generally speaking, it's out of use and you can expect only a certain fraction of the people you meet to know the meaning of the word (or its existence for that matter).

    Twice in the last couple of months I've been asked by U.S. clients what 'NB' means in some of our doco. Sure, it's Latin, but so are 'e.g.', 'i.e.' and 'etc'...

  • Jno (unregistered) in reply to gwenhwyfaer
    gwenhwyfaer:
    Sgt. Preston:
    Jim Bob:
    you're a fucking faggot
    Too cool, Jim Bob! You can tell from just his comments both his sexual orientation and what he's doing right now? I am totally impressed!
    Wasn't Jim Bob* just remarking on his surprise at discovering that the being with whom he had been anticipating a deep and meaningful discourse on the vagaries of grammar through the ages *deep breath* turned out, in fact, to be a peculiarly sentient bundle of firewood?
    No, no, a peculiarly sentient ball of cooked offal. Delicious with an onion gravy.

    /captcha: cognac. That may be taking the epicurean delights too far.

  • jakkle (unregistered) in reply to Rhialto
    Rhialto:
    Jim Bob:
    The Frinton Mafia:
    DP:
    forfend \for-FEND\, transitive verb: 1. a. (Archaic) To prohibit; to forbid. b. To ward off; to prevent; to avert. 2. To defend; to protect; to preserve.

    ahahahahahahahahah

    Is that guy from the 13th century?

    Nah, he's just literate. That's what we call it when someone is able to use language to communicate. In this case, by using 'forfend' rather than 'forbid', he's creating a humorous, tongue-in-cheek effect that offsets the otherwise negative tone of his comment.

    See? That's not so hard, is it? Let's try another example:

    "Heaven forfend you choose to educate yourself rather than yipping at the ankles of your betters."

    you're a fucking faggot

    What? A bundle of sticks?

    Oh, by the way, you forgot the full stop at the end of your purported sentence.

    And the capital letter. Fool.

  • Matt Foley (unregistered) in reply to Matthew Watson
    Matthew Watson:
    The term "heaven forfend", however, is a fairly common idiom. I see it used quite a lot. One has only to google for the term to see how common it actually is.

    Google fight: heaven forfend = 116,000 results heaven forbid = 1,260,000 results

    I say if you're gonna use the archaic, you will end up living in a van, down by the river.

  • (cs) in reply to Jim Bob
    Jim Bob:
    The Frinton Mafia:
    DP:
    forfend \for-FEND\, transitive verb: 1. a. (Archaic) To prohibit; to forbid. b. To ward off; to prevent; to avert. 2. To defend; to protect; to preserve.

    ahahahahahahahahah

    Is that guy from the 13th century?

    Nah, he's just literate. That's what we call it when someone is able to use language to communicate. In this case, by using 'forfend' rather than 'forbid', he's creating a humorous, tongue-in-cheek effect that offsets the otherwise negative tone of his comment.

    See? That's not so hard, is it? Let's try another example:

    "Heaven forfend you choose to educate yourself rather than yipping at the ankles of your betters."

    you're a fucking faggot

    ... said the butthead.

  • Ragnax (unregistered) in reply to Simetrical
    Simetrical:
    "The problem is that IE just doesn't bother rendering anything outside of an enclosing element. It just doesn't draw the parts that stick out."

    Maybe you should try overflow: visible?

    Using overflow: visible in IE still cuts off background images set through the background-image css attribute. Ran into that particular bug myself just today.

  • (cs) in reply to DP
    DP:
    forfend \for-FEND\, transitive verb: 1. a. (Archaic) To prohibit; to forbid. b. To ward off; to prevent; to avert. 2. To defend; to protect; to preserve.

    ahahahahahahahahah

    Is that guy from the 13th century?

    People still use at least the phrase "heaven forfend". The word is rarely used in other contexts, granted.

  • Emil Stenström (unregistered)

    Being a "web programmer" myself I can only find one way to stop their nagging. Just set position: relative; on the element and it will start showing stuff outside of it's bounding box.

Leave a comment on “Inflammatory Comments”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

« Return to Article