fulcy Posted August 29, 2004 Share Posted August 29, 2004 (edited) First & foremost, from Merriem Websters:Main Entry: ir·re·gard·less Pronunciation: "ir-i-'gärd-l&s Function: adverb Etymology: probably blend of irrespective and regardless Date: circa 1912 nonstandard : REGARDLESS usage Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that "there is no such word." There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead. Despite its uncommon use, it is still a word. Great that you can quote something from the dictionary, and not give it's definition. What's the definition of irregardless? ir·re·gard·less Audio pronunciation of "irregardless" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (r-gärdls) adv. Nonstandard Regardless. So why the hell, unless you're ignorant, would you use irregardless? Continuing from the entry in dictionary.com [Probably blend of irrespective, and regardless.] Usage Note: Irregardless is a word that many mistakenly believe to be correct usage in formal style, when in fact it is used chiefly in nonstandard speech or casual writing. Coined in the United States in the early 20th century, it has met with a blizzard of condemnation for being an improper yoking of irrespective and regardless and for the logical absurdity of combining the negative ir- prefix and -less suffix in a single term. Although one might reasonably argue that it is no different from words with redundant affixes like debone and unravel, it has been considered a blunder for decades and will probably continue to be so. Yet another example of a word that the ignorant people in the US make up, and continue to use, even though it formally and stylistically incorrect... EDIT: oh, and try to figure out how to use the function - it works wonders for making your responses legible... Edited August 29, 2004 by fulcy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zentrandude Posted August 29, 2004 Share Posted August 29, 2004 Yet another example of a word that the ignorant people in the US make up, and continue to use, even though it formally and stylistically incorrect... slow down there speedy. language is always evolving so it may not be a word now but it will be later, if that wasn't the case we would be still using old english here or latin. give a few years and 911 would be a word that everyone knows that b4 that happen everyone knew as the number to call in an emergency. its also the reason why us english is diffent than british enlish. man keith and exo your like the twins of haterist and hurin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fulcy Posted August 29, 2004 Share Posted August 29, 2004 Yet another example of a word that the ignorant people in the US make up, and continue to use, even though it formally and stylistically incorrect... slow down there speedy. language is always evolving so it may not be a word now but it will be later, if that wasn't the case we would be still using old english here or latin. give a few years and 911 would be a word that everyone knows that b4 that happen everyone knew as the number to call in an emergency. its also the reason why us english is diffent than british enlish. man keith and exo your like the twins of haterist and hurin i'm not saying language can't evolve. I'm saying that words that shouldn't exist, and serve no special purpose (irregardless means regardless, so why not just use regardless? That and the fact that it's basically a double negative...) should not be thought of as proper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bsu legato Posted August 29, 2004 Share Posted August 29, 2004 Why is Keith even bothering to reply to this thread anymore? My last post should have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that he has no leg to stand on, much less a clue what he's talking about. But instead, he choses to obfuscate the issue with personal attacks and stupid dictionary definitions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EXO Posted August 29, 2004 Share Posted August 29, 2004 man keith and exo your like the twins of haterist and hurin lol, I realized that... While I was copying and pasting resposes, I was thinking, WTF did I get myself into? There's only one word for it... diriculous.... yes, I'm aware of the spelling... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JsARCLIGHT Posted August 29, 2004 Share Posted August 29, 2004 (edited) He say you Brade Runnuh... I think some skinjobs should back off from their over emotional Blade Runner arguments before this lovely Brade Runnuh thread gets locked. This is why we build replicants with incept dates and termination dates... so they stop arguing over semantics. Edited August 29, 2004 by JsARCLIGHT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uxi Posted August 29, 2004 Share Posted August 29, 2004 This thread is funny. Elistism and trolling in the same thread. I've always thought Blade-runner was overrated. Usually by the pointy-headed scientific types who probably the subjects of this poll. It's an ok movie, but definately behind 2001 as far as "hard-SF" is concerned. The Japan aura is so early 80s cliche, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JELEINEN Posted August 29, 2004 Share Posted August 29, 2004 Yet another example of a word that the ignorant people in the US make up, and continue to use, even though it formally and stylistically incorrect... slow down there speedy. language is always evolving so it may not be a word now but it will be later, if that wasn't the case we would be still using old english here or latin. give a few years and 911 would be a word that everyone knows that b4 that happen everyone knew as the number to call in an emergency. its also the reason why us english is diffent than british enlish. man keith and exo your like the twins of haterist and hurin People who don't know how to use uppercase letters should not comment on other's grammar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zentrandude Posted August 29, 2004 Share Posted August 29, 2004 Yet another example of a word that the ignorant people in the US make up, and continue to use, even though it formally and stylistically incorrect... slow down there speedy. language is always evolving so it may not be a word now but it will be later, if that wasn't the case we would be still using old english here or latin. give a few years and 911 would be a word that everyone knows that b4 that happen everyone knew as the number to call in an emergency. its also the reason why us english is diffent than british enlish. man keith and exo your like the twins of haterist and hurin People who don't know how to use uppercase letters should not comment on other's grammar. too bad this isn't about grammer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EXO Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 grammer or spelling... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 Are we quite done playing amature English teacher? Or should we comb through each and everyones posts to point out inconsequencial typo's? Yes, the definition of Irregardless is "regardless," but you missed the point that "irregardless" is a word none the less, and one that's been in use for over 60 years. Why is Keith even bothering to reply to this thread anymore? My last post should have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that he has no leg to stand on, much less a clue what he's talking about. But instead, he choses to obfuscate the issue with personal attacks and stupid dictionary definitions. Is that what you were trying to do? Looked far more like you were blowing hot air & wasting bandwidth. You think you're right because you say so, you think I'm wrong because of whatever inane reason you choose to dissagree, and in the end, you're a hypocrite condemning me of having an obstinate opinion while displaying one yourself. EDIT: oh, and try to figure out how to use the QUOTE function - it works wonders for making your responses legible... And this has what to do with the topic at hand??? Bottom line, I never said the old studio edit should be whiped off the face of the Earth (just pointed out that it has been). I merely asked why anyone would want to bother with it in the face of better versions being available. If you can't accept that, then bite me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EXO Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 (edited) Are we quite done playing amature English teacher? Or should we comb through each and everyones posts to point out inconsequencial typo's? Yes, the definition of Irregardless is "regardless," but you missed the point that "irregardless" is a word none the less, and one that's been in use for over 60 years. Why is Keith even bothering to reply to this thread anymore? My last post should have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that he has no leg to stand on, much less a clue what he's talking about. But instead, he choses to obfuscate the issue with personal attacks and stupid dictionary definitions. Is that what you were trying to do? Looked far more like you were blowing hot air & wasting bandwidth. You think you're right because you say so, you think I'm wrong because of whatever inane reason you choose to dissagree, and in the end, you're a hypocrite condemning me of having an obstinate opinion while displaying one yourself. EDIT: oh, and try to figure out how to use the QUOTE function - it works wonders for making your responses legible... And this has what to do with the topic at hand??? Bottom line, I never said the old studio edit should be whiped off the face of the Earth (just pointed out that it has been). I merely asked why anyone would want to bother with it in the face of better versions being available. If you can't accept that, then bite me. Dude, get over it... it's done... I stopped responding when I read your response at the joke I made about your mispelling... I can't believe you took that serious... then I knew you were just out to counter everything I posted... regardless what it is... joke or serious... yet you try to bait a new argument... I tried to bring up new points but you just reitierate the same points over and over... you got nothing... Edited August 30, 2004 by >EXO< Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSW Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 Blade Runner is good, but overated IMHO...both versions dumbed down the original storey, filling it with some pretty yet unimportant action, technology and SFX...more Nerumancer then Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep And Metropolis was likely left off (or just overlooked) because so few have actualy seen it...heck, practicaly everyone that has, have only seen the US edited version...and even fewer have seen it as it was originaly intended because some 40 minutes of it has been lost to time (film deteriorated). although the new DVD tis quite good, includes as much of the original as possable, even a recreation of the original music that was performed in theaters while it played (Freddy Mercurys mom likely wasn't even a twinkle in her fathers eye when the film was originaly made). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fulcy Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 Yes, the definition of Irregardless is "regardless," but you missed the point that "irregardless" is a word none the less, and one that's been in use for over 60 years. Just trying to enlighten you in your small, self centered world. But if you choose to remain ignorant, then so be it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 I tried to bring up new points but you just reitierate the same points over and over... you got nothing... When was that? Were the new points the various insults you were tossing out? And your "joke" about mispelling seemed a hell of a lot more like a pathetic attempt at drawing away from the subject all together. If this is how you choose to end it however, that's fine. Just trying to enlighten you in your small, self centered world. But if you choose to remain ignorant, then so be it... Seemed a lot more like you were trying to demean me by claiming that I was using a fictitious word. I merely "enlightened" you by illustrating that it both does exist, and holds legitimate usage. If you choose to remain ignorant on that matter, whatever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fulcy Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 (edited) I tried to bring up new points but you just reitierate the same points over and over... you got nothing... When was that? Were the new points the various insults you were tossing out? And your "joke" about mispelling seemed a hell of a lot more like a pathetic attempt at drawing away from the subject all together. If this is how you choose to end it however, that's fine. Just trying to enlighten you in your small, self centered world. But if you choose to remain ignorant, then so be it... Seemed a lot more like you were trying to demean me by claiming that I was using a fictitious word. I merely "enlightened" you by illustrating that it both does exist, and holds legitimate usage. If you choose to remain ignorant on that matter, whatever. Actually, I was more just trying to piss you off - I didn't really care either way... seems like it worked. Edited August 30, 2004 by fulcy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bsu legato Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 Is that what you were trying to do? Looked far more like you were blowing hot air & wasting bandwidth. You think you're right because you say so, you think I'm wrong because of whatever inane reason you choose to dissagree, and in the end, you're a hypocrite condemning me of having an obstinate opinion while displaying one yourself. Is that the best you could do? I'm not saying you're wrong because I'm obstinant, but because I have written, published proof by one of the leading Blade Runner historians. Deal with it. If you choose to not believe me, then read the fecking book for yourself. Either way, you're just making yourself look stupid by belaboring the point. Attacking me does absolutely nothing to rebut my point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EXO Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 When was that? Were the new points the various insults you were tossing out? And your "joke" about mispelling seemed a hell of a lot more like a pathetic attempt at drawing away from the subject all together. If this is how you choose to end it however, that's fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 Actually, I was more just trying to piss you off - I didn't really care either way... seems like it worked. Baby, you ain't seen me pissed off. Though if it makes you happier to believe so, go right on ahead. Is that the best you could do? I'm not saying you're wrong because I'm obstinant, but because I have written, published proof by one of the leading Blade Runner historians. Deal with it. If you choose to not believe me, then read the fecking book for yourself. Either way, you're just making yourself look stupid by belaboring the point. Attacking me does absolutely nothing to rebut my point. And you're making yourself look stupid by doing nothing but throwing insults, instead of sticking with the topic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fulcy Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 Actually, I was more just trying to piss you off - I didn't really care either way... seems like it worked. Baby, you ain't seen me pissed off. Though if it makes you happier to believe so, go right on ahead. baby? so you swing for the other team? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bsu legato Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 And you're making yourself look stupid by doing nothing but throwing insults, instead of sticking with the topic. Ok then, tough guy. Why don't you try to actually refute my initial point about the so-called Director's Cut that you want to bludgeon everybody into choosing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JsARCLIGHT Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 "Yarrr... that was a quarter, he'll be dancin' all day." ANYWAY... Anyone know where a chap can get him one of those Japanese "not blade runner but still blade runner" large scale metal spinner cars? I saw one for sale on MW before but did not get a chance to get it then... still looking for one... Also wondering if anyone has Rachel's spinner made by Ertl on the card, it's the only one of the Ertl four I'm missing... oh and the four pack set too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 baby? so you swing for the other team? Sorry, but no. Ok then, tough guy. Why don't you try to actually refute my initial point about the so-called Director's Cut that you want to bludgeon everybody into choosing? What's to refute? I never said the current "DC" is the end all & be all of existence, merely that it's an improved version when compared with the original studio edit. Should the rumored super DC make an appearance to the world, then that would obviously be the version to get. Perhaps if you spent a little less time trying to vlifify someone with a different opinion, and a little more time reading what people are actually saying... Besides, I never "bludgened" anyone into anything. When it comes back down to it, I merely asked why anyone would want to bother with the old studio edit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EXO Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 "Yarrr... that was a quarter, he'll be dancin' all day." ANYWAY... Anyone know where a chap can get him one of those Japanese "not blade runner but still blade runner" large scale metal spinner cars? I saw one for sale on MW before but did not get a chance to get it then... still looking for one... Also wondering if anyone has Rachel's spinner made by Ertl on the card, it's the only one of the Ertl four I'm missing... oh and the four pack set too. YAAAR! Ya missed Fulcy's auction!!! I wanted it to... too damn broke... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fulcy Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 Anyone know where a chap can get him one of those Japanese "not blade runner but still blade runner" large scale metal spinner cars? I saw one for sale on MW before but did not get a chance to get it then... still looking for one...Also wondering if anyone has Rachel's spinner made by Ertl on the card, it's the only one of the Ertl four I'm missing... oh and the four pack set too. Uhm, you'd be better off buying a piece of poop and labeling it as the spinner from blade runner. I was the one selling it, and I hated it from the second I removed it from the packaging. There was NONE, I repeat, NO diecast whatsoever present in this car - big lump of plastic, and though it looked good, it didn't feel right - the transformation mechanism was a little... weird. Glad I got rid of it, and only lost about $10 on it (from initial price I paid to price I sold it on ebay for). Good riddance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fulcy Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 baby? so you swing for the other team? Sorry, but no. Dammit - you go and get a guy's hopes up, and then -DASH-... Sniff Sniff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bsu legato Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 What's to refute? I never said the current "DC" is the end all & be all of existence, merely that it's an improved version when compared with the original studio edit. Should the rumored super DC make an appearance to the world, then that would obviously be the version to get. Perhaps if you spent a little less time trying to vlifify someone with a different opinion, and a little more time reading what people are actually saying... As usual, you entirely missed the point. While in your eyes the current "Director's Cut" might be an improvement, it is in no way, shape or form Ridley Scott's director's cut, and if you had any understanding of how the 1992 DC was produced, you might not have wasted our time with your ranting about "artistic integrity" and "studio edits." Again, since you apparently skimed over my initial post, I will restate the facts that are painfully obvious to anybody who has followed the Blade Runner ordeal; The 1992 DC is not a "real" director's cut. It has as much "artistic" validity as the original 1982 theatrical cut, and the subsequent VHS releases. Thus, if a viewer prefers one version or the other, there is no "right" version. Yet. Besides, I never "bludgened" anyone into anything. When it comes back down to it, I merely asked why anyone would want to bother with the old studio edit. You honestly don't even realize what you're posting half the time, do you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bsu legato Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 Anyone know where a chap can get him one of those Japanese "not blade runner but still blade runner" large scale metal spinner cars? I saw one for sale on MW before but did not get a chance to get it then... still looking for one...Also wondering if anyone has Rachel's spinner made by Ertl on the card, it's the only one of the Ertl four I'm missing... oh and the four pack set too. What you need to do is seek out the awesome Spinners that Monsters in Motion carries. Freakin' awesome, especially the biggest scale one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JsARCLIGHT Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 Are those MiM Spinners kit or toy? Models and I have an agreement to stay 50 yards away from each other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JsARCLIGHT Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 Uhm, you'd be better off buying a piece of poop and labeling it as the spinner from blade runner. So... so... you own the Ertl cars too?!? I swear, you'd think this movie would have spawned better licensed items than what it has. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bsu legato Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 Are those MiM Spinners kit or toy?Models and I have an agreement to stay 50 yards away from each other. They have one of each. However, looking again I see that their large scale toy appears to be the same Japanese toy that you and Fulcy are talking about. Check them out HERE. they used to have a smaller scale Spinner, but it must be OOP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JsARCLIGHT Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 That 1/24 scale spinner I saw but DAAAAAAAAAAMN for 5 big ones I'd prefer it be able to fly under it's own power... What scale is the Jap toy, 1/18? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fulcy Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 That 1/24 scale spinner I saw but DAAAAAAAAAAMN for 5 big ones I'd prefer it be able to fly under it's own power... What scale is the Jap toy, 1/18? Yes - 1/18th. Was about 9 or 10 inches long, from Medicom. Really not worth the price I bought or sold it for ($60...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bsu legato Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 Was about 9 or 10 inches long, from Medicom. Really not worth the price I bought or sold it for ($60...) Is that the same one that MiM is selling for $499? I always knew they were overpriced, but damn..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JsARCLIGHT Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 If I'm not mistaken that Medicom toy does not even have the markings or the rack lights, right? It's just a grey blob made to look similair to the spinner but be different enough to not be... Rats. How is it's quality compared to say the "Andriod Hunter" doll. I have that doll and I think it's nice enough for what it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.