Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
If he can't read, then why type him a sentence?On Mon, 3 May 2010 18:29:53 -0400, "Otto Bahn" <Ladybrr...@GroinToHell.com
wrote:
k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote
You want to be a pain in my ass, but you're meerly irritating.
How strange that you think this is about you. We were talking about
oTTo.
That is indeed strange, because you've been conversing with Michael.
Most
would consider it good form to address your questions to the person "it"
is
about, instead of a third party.
I'm a second, not third, party.
You can't read either.
That would explain how I scored 875 on my English SAT.
Not only can't you read, but you're a liar, too.
Where, then, does he lie?On Mon, 3 May 2010 17:12:50 -0700 (PDT), Darius<blueriverday@yahoo.com
wrote:
On May 3, 8:05 pm, "k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"<k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
wrote:
On Mon, 3 May 2010 18:29:53 -0400, "Otto Bahn"<Ladybrr...@GroinToHell.com
wrote:
k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote
You want to be a pain in my ass, but you're meerly irritating.
How strange that you think this is about you. We were talking about
oTTo.
That is indeed strange, because you've been conversing with Michael.
Most
would consider it good form to address your questions to the person "it"
is
about, instead of a third party.
I'm a second, not third, party.
You can't read either.
That would explain how I scored 875 on my English SAT.
Not only can't you read, but you're a liar, too.
If he can't read, then why type him a sentence?
He lies.
He took an electronic version and pegged the needle, so they estimatedOn Mon, 3 May 2010 18:29:53 -0400, "Otto Bahn"
Ladybrrane@GroinToHell.com> wrote:
That would explain how I scored 875 on my English SAT.
Last I heard there was no such thing as an SAT score over 800...
Post proof or retract.You want to be a pain in my ass, but you're meerly irritating.
How strange that you think this is about you. We were talking about
oTTo.
That is indeed strange, because you've been conversing with Michael.
Most
would consider it good form to address your questions to the person
"it"
is
about, instead of a third party.
I'm a second, not third, party.
You can't read either.
That would explain how I scored 875 on my English SAT.
Not only can't you read, but you're a liar, too.
How old are you? When I took the SAT, most you were eitherYou want to be a pain in my ass, but you're meerly irritating.
How strange that you think this is about you. We were talking about
oTTo.
That is indeed strange, because you've been conversing with Michael.
Most
would consider it good form to address your questions to the person
"it"
is
about, instead of a third party.
I'm a second, not third, party.
You can't read either.
That would explain how I scored 875 on my English SAT.
Did the scoring change? When I took the SATs the max score was 800. I
scored a freakishly even 680/710 if I recall correctly.
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote
You want to be a pain in my ass, but you're meerly irritating.
How strange that you think this is about you. We were talking about
oTTo.
That is indeed strange, because you've been conversing with Michael.
Most
would consider it good form to address your questions to the person
"it"
is
about, instead of a third party.
I'm a second, not third, party.
You can't read either.
That would explain how I scored 875 on my English SAT.
Not only can't you read, but you're a liar, too.
Post proof or retract.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT_test
Wikipedia is not a valid cite. Anyone can fake a web page.You want to be a pain in my ass, but you're meerly irritating.
How strange that you think this is about you. We were talking
about
oTTo.
That is indeed strange, because you've been conversing with
Michael.
Most
would consider it good form to address your questions to the person
"it"
is
about, instead of a third party.
I'm a second, not third, party.
You can't read either.
That would explain how I scored 875 on my English SAT.
Not only can't you read, but you're a liar, too.
Post proof or retract.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT_test
So any web page he cites you'll reject? Hmm... ok...Wikipedia is not a valid cite. Anyone can fake a web page.
Maybe someone should fix it to show how the SAT was scoredWikipedia is not a valid cite. Anyone can fake a web page.
So any web page he cites you'll reject? Hmm... ok...
Wikipedia is audited regularly and generally found to be as accurate as
printed encyclopedias: It's not that Wikipedia doesn't have difficulty
ensuring accuracy (vandalism, just plain poor research, etc.) -- it's
clear that it does, and its shortcomings are obvious to most --, it's that
printed encyclopedias were never as "scholarly"/well-researched as most
people assumed, generally containing plenty of errors... that would
persist for years and years, whereas at least Wikipedia tends to get fixed
pretty quickly.
Maybe, but on any given day you can't assume it's correct.(My wife had a textbook in elementary school that listed Portland as the
capital of Oregon. This was *in* Oregon, so while the teacher was quick
to point out that the textbook was wrong, one has to wonder how many
thousands of kids in other states used that particular textbook year after
year, learning the wrong information... Try changing Wikipedia to claim
that Portland is Oregon's capital and I'll wager it won't stay up for more
than a day...)
It'll survive for maximally five minutes, probably much less. (If the(My wife had a textbook in elementary school that listed Portland as the
capital of Oregon. This was *in* Oregon, so while the teacher was quick
to point out that the textbook was wrong, one has to wonder how many
thousands of kids in other states used that particular textbook year
after
year, learning the wrong information... Try changing Wikipedia to claim
that Portland is Oregon's capital and I'll wager it won't stay up for
more than a day...)
Maybe, but on any given day you can't assume it's correct.
----oTTo--
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote
You want to be a pain in my ass, but you're meerly irritating.
How strange that you think this is about you. We were talking
about
oTTo.
That is indeed strange, because you've been conversing with
Michael.
Most
would consider it good form to address your questions to the person
"it"
is
about, instead of a third party.
I'm a second, not third, party.
You can't read either.
That would explain how I scored 875 on my English SAT.
Not only can't you read, but you're a liar, too.
Post proof or retract.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT_test
Wikipedia is not a valid cite. Anyone can fake a web page.
Mark Edwards <Mark-Edwards@comcast.net> wrote:
You misspelt 'merely', 'straem' (a before e except as in dream) and 'roe'
(if you're in a straem, you'll be wanting to collect fish eggs. Otherwise,
this rhythm makes no sense.)
Unless, like Alice, you're repeatedly catching crabs.
Yeah, because when you ass-u-me, you makeMaybe, but on any given day you can't assume it's correct.
--oTTo--
If "anyone can fake a web page", it is not possible to "post proof" by yourOtto Bahn wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote
That would explain how I scored 875 on my English SAT.
Not only can't you read, but you're a liar, too.
Post proof or retract.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT_test
Wikipedia is not a valid cite. Anyone can fake a web page.
Post proof or retract.
They are now, anyway. I wonder if the scale change from 900 to 800That would explain how I scored 875 on my English SAT.
Not only can't you read, but you're a liar, too.
Post proof or retract.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT_test
Wikipedia is not a valid cite. Anyone can fake a web page.
Post proof or retract.
If "anyone can fake a web page", it is not possible to "post proof" by
your
definition....
Is the vowel of "cot" the same as the one of "caught"?...post proof of
your
answer, but links to audio files are not acceptable....
On the other hand, if it's just Wikipedia you have a problem with, here's
a page
from the SAT Testing Board's own site:
http://sat.collegeboard.com/scores/understanding-sat-scores
Note that the first text on the page other than headers and menus reads:
SAT scores are reported on a scale from 200-800
and that the second paragraph elaborates as:
SAT Subject Test scores are reported on a scale from 200-800
being a liar.krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote
You want to be a pain in my ass, but you're meerly irritating.
How strange that you think this is about you. We were talking about
oTTo.
That is indeed strange, because you've been conversing with Michael.
Most
would consider it good form to address your questions to the person
"it"
is
about, instead of a third party.
I'm a second, not third, party.
You can't read either.
That would explain how I scored 875 on my English SAT.
Not only can't you read, but you're a liar, too.
Post proof or retract.
--oTTo--
I already did, yesterday, proving once again that you're illiterate as well as
The range was 200 to 800 in 1969, too, liar."Joel Koltner" <zapwireDASHgroups@yahoo.com> wrote
Wikipedia is not a valid cite. Anyone can fake a web page.
So any web page he cites you'll reject? Hmm... ok...
Wikipedia is audited regularly and generally found to be as accurate as
printed encyclopedias: It's not that Wikipedia doesn't have difficulty
ensuring accuracy (vandalism, just plain poor research, etc.) -- it's
clear that it does, and its shortcomings are obvious to most --, it's that
printed encyclopedias were never as "scholarly"/well-researched as most
people assumed, generally containing plenty of errors... that would
persist for years and years, whereas at least Wikipedia tends to get fixed
pretty quickly.
Maybe someone should fix it to show how the SAT was scored
in 1969.
We *know* that you lie, so we can indeed assume *it* is correct.(My wife had a textbook in elementary school that listed Portland as the
capital of Oregon. This was *in* Oregon, so while the teacher was quick
to point out that the textbook was wrong, one has to wonder how many
thousands of kids in other states used that particular textbook year after
year, learning the wrong information... Try changing Wikipedia to claim
that Portland is Oregon's capital and I'll wager it won't stay up for more
than a day...)
Maybe, but on any given day you can't assume it's correct.
--oTTo--
No, the scale hasn't changed, liar."R H Draney" <dadoctah@spamcop.net> wrote
That would explain how I scored 875 on my English SAT.
Not only can't you read, but you're a liar, too.
Post proof or retract.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT_test
Wikipedia is not a valid cite. Anyone can fake a web page.
Post proof or retract.
If "anyone can fake a web page", it is not possible to "post proof" by
your
definition....
Is the vowel of "cot" the same as the one of "caught"?...post proof of
your
answer, but links to audio files are not acceptable....
On the other hand, if it's just Wikipedia you have a problem with, here's
a page
from the SAT Testing Board's own site:
http://sat.collegeboard.com/scores/understanding-sat-scores
Note that the first text on the page other than headers and menus reads:
SAT scores are reported on a scale from 200-800
and that the second paragraph elaborates as:
SAT Subject Test scores are reported on a scale from 200-800
They are now, anyway. I wonder if the scale change from 900 to 800
was prompted by declining test scores?
--oTTo--
indeed 200-800. What a liar."Lewis" <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote
You want to be a pain in my ass, but you're meerly irritating.
How strange that you think this is about you. We were talking about
oTTo.
That is indeed strange, because you've been conversing with Michael.
Most
would consider it good form to address your questions to the person
"it"
is
about, instead of a third party.
I'm a second, not third, party.
You can't read either.
That would explain how I scored 875 on my English SAT.
Did the scoring change? When I took the SATs the max score was 800. I
scored a freakishly even 680/710 if I recall correctly.
How old are you? When I took the SAT, most you were either
in diapers or just a gleam in your father's eye.
--oTTo--
I took them the same year you did, needle dick. The range for each test was
Surely we could combine them, and make a slatherable paste and/or plaster?David DeLaney wrote:
Mark Edwards <Mark-Edwards@comcast.net> wrote:
You misspelt 'merely', 'straem' (a before e except as in dream) and 'roe'
(if you're in a straem, you'll be wanting to collect fish eggs. Otherwise,
this rhythm makes no sense.)
Unless, like Alice, you're repeatedly catching crabs.
Have you got a crab quadrille recipe? Or are you saying an ointment
is required?