Fez909
toilet expert
You don't need pipes when you're the source. Gas = dead dragons, as any school kid knows.So they've converted the dragon to a natural gas supply? Where's the pipes?
You don't need pipes when you're the source. Gas = dead dragons, as any school kid knows.So they've converted the dragon to a natural gas supply? Where's the pipes?
Yeah, that was shit.Yes but it's terrible again
Why make a big deal about it being Baelish's face then? If all she wanted were more anonymous faces she'll have a wardrobe full after what she did to the FraysAlso, a face is a face. There's probably plenty of people across Westeros and beyond who wouldn't recognise Baelish from any other face in the crowd, but it gives Arya one more face to hide behind, should she need to.
Is it just me or has the dialogue got a lot more modern?
'Reliable source of information' seems more suited to a cop show than a dungeons and dragons show.
Is it just me or has the dialogue got a lot more modern?
'Reliable source of information' seems more suited to a cop show than a dungeons and dragons show.
Given when the show had a smaller audience and budget they hired people to make the invented languages sound authentic, this may be part of the tonal shift towards the climax aimed at drawing in a bigger audience. They are pitching this at LotRs and Marvel Cinematic Universe type fans now. More accessible language may be a deliberate choice.Is it just me or has the dialogue got a lot more modern?
'Reliable source of information' seems more suited to a cop show than a dungeons and dragons show.
irregardless
Wow. That was page 12. Are you going to quote every pedant's fallacy on the thread cause I'm pretty sure there's some less/fewer nonsense as well. Irregardless has been an English word for well over two hundred years and a perfectly fine one it is too.
That embiggens the thread.Indeed, it's a perfectly cromulent word.
Wow. That was page 12. Are you going to quote every pedant's fallacy on the thread cause I'm pretty sure there's some less/fewer nonsense as well. Irregardless has been an English word for well over two hundred years and a perfectly fine one it is too.
I may well do. Surely you've twigged by now that one of my finest qualities is an aptitude for being a pedantic grammar twat?Wow. That was page 12. Are you going to quote every pedant's fallacy on the thread cause I'm pretty sure there's some less/fewer nonsense as well.
No it's not. Irrespective, or regardless, pick one. Irregardless simply doesn't make sense.Irregardless has been an English word for well over two hundred years and a perfectly fine one it is too.
Oxford English Dictionary said:Irregardless means the same as regardless, but the negative prefix ir- merely duplicates the suffix -less, and is unnecessary. The word dates back to the 19th century, but is regarded as incorrect in standard English
Irregardless of your feelings on the subject it's a perfectly comprehensible word and none of us learn how to speak from the OED. It's a 'hoho aren't I clever' response to a particular word that you've learned. You haven't analysed anything or proved anything. It's just pointless fuckeries.I may well do. Surely you've twigged by now that one of my finest qualities is an aptitude for being a pedantic grammar twat?
No it's not. Irrespective, or regardless, pick one. Irregardless simply doesn't make sense.
No. I'm not.Are you being pedantic about his pedantry?
No. I'm not.
My opinion of you is so low that I genuinely and honestly don't know if you're trying to make some not relevant to this conversation point about using the wrong word or if you really are that illiterate and stupid. Honestly, I don't know.That's exactly what I'd accept you to say.
Again, it's a particular forte that I've invested a great deal of time and effort in cultivating.Irregardless of your feelings on the subject it's a perfectly comprehensible word and none of us learn how to speak from the OED. It's a 'hoho aren't I clever' response to a particular word that you've learned. You haven't analysed anything or proved anything. It's just pointless fuckeries.
My opinion of you is so low that I genuinely and honestly don't know if you're trying to make some not relevant to this conversation point about using the wrong word or if you really are that illiterate and stupid. Honestly, I don't know.
That's the most craven way of saying "I totally took your bait"
Invested/wasted. Whatever. Let's stop fucking up the thread eh.Again, it's a particular forte that I've invested a great deal of time and effort in cultivating.
shagged his aunt and all, irregardless!
definitely nothing wrong with this ^
but after all that build up it was a bit of an auntieclimaxshagged his aunt and all, irregardless!
definitely nothing wrong with this ^
Very plausible theory that might have been staring us in the face all along and which might have huge repercussions...
The Stark children's direwolves seem to be pointers to their fates. Rickon's was killed by the Boltons, and he was killed by a Bolton. Robb's was killed by the Freys - as was he. Which leaves Sanaa's - Lady - who was killed by a Stark - Ned. Ghost is still alive but is called Ghost and Jon has come back after death. Brann's dog Summer was killed by the White Walkers, and Arya's, Nymeria, is off being a lone wolf..
They were following Bolton's orders, so it's a reasonable enough comment.And, erm, Rickon's direwolf was killed by the umbers, not Boltons.