or perhaps they don't know the way and they are following their mother if not what do you mean explain what u mean.
Whoooaaaa dduuuuuude .. . ... ..... . . ............. . . . . .u jusss dropped da roach. . . ......... . . . . . .... . ... . ..wunnaaa like.... . ....... . . ...... ......pick it up .... . . ....?
Thanks for that. Now I get to use the term SPACKMAN on this board for the first time. For those of you not familiar with it it is an internet term relatively new to most messageboards, having originated in the football board circles, on one board in particular in fact meaning posting something that's already been posted. Since 'chav' and 'bouncebackability' have made it into the dictionary I'm trying to promote the word Spackman. The original incidence of a Spackman being commited was when Nigel Spackman, then manager of Barnsley was sacked. The story was discussed all day and then "announced" in the evening by some poor unsuspecting fool. Some say it was Simon, others say it was Tracy. Anyway, that's a Spackman if ever I saw one, IMMEDIATELY after my post as well!
Ben....I don't think these people care And for everyone else, I think I understand what she is trying to say. Something I learned in Zoology my senior year... The reason why ducks fly in that v-shape is due to their genetics as well as where the sun is in reference to different natural landmarks. But they don't know for certain. And if you think about it long enough, yes, it can be a mind fuck
Ducks don't fly in a V, geese fly in a V. And it's only a Spackman to one who does not understand the difference between a sign and a symptom. You seem to be very happy with your Spackmanification of my post but, as they say, ignorance is bliss. A sign is a clinical feature of a disease or condition and directly observed and in many, but not all, cases measured. A symptom is something that the patient feels or complains about, such as weariness. Symptoms cannot be directly observed. In clinical diagnosis both signs and symptoms are taken into account. So you see, since both signs and symptoms must be taken into account my post was not a Spackman but a necessary corollary. In fact, I could go further. The original poster did not complain of anything, but merely exibhited a directly obseravble behavior indicative of a fucked mind, this is a sign, not a symptom. So if anything is a Spackman it was your post. Granted it was a pre-emptive Spackman and it was a bit of a miss as well, but if we can have pre-emptive war we can just as easily have pre-emptive Spackmans.
A symptom and a sign are the same thing in this context. just the affected person doesn't notice it doesn't mean it's not there! Tell you what though, you carry on using the word Spackman in your posts and encouraging others to do so and i'll willingly concede every argument I ever have with you!
A sign and a symptom are only the same thing when the patient actively complains of something that is independantly a sign, even then the comparison is shaky at best. This is clearly not the case here. The only other time when they can be the "same" thing is in the case of incorrect usage. I will indeed use the term Spackman in my posts when it is relevant. However, if you conceed every argument then I will be out a good interlocutor; a rare thing on these forums or anywhere. So I would rather you did not do that.
