• 4 Posts
  • 333 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 6th, 2023

help-circle

  • Do nothing / don’t show any romantic interest.

    Get to know her better as a friend. If she becomes interested or is interested in anything more, believe me you will know.

    Seriously, just forget about any romantic possibility. If she is interested then she will make it happen… otherwise you will just ruin your son’s friendship for no reason.




  • UmeU@lemmy.worldtoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldI hate that that happens
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    Because your example sentence uses the word ‘went’ rather than ‘was’, you need a comma because those are two separate I dependent clauses.

    You and Dave were together and then Dave leaves you and goes driving by himself… me and Dave, then Dave went.

    If you used ‘was’ then those would not be independent clauses and therefore a comma would not be used. It was me and Dave and Dave was driving.

    Edit: also, why the downvote, we are having a conversation here ??


  • UmeU@lemmy.worldtoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldI hate that that happens
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    I don’t believe that’s accurate.

    There are only two things in the list, pig & whistle.

    They want more space between pig and &.

    They also want more space between & and whistle.

    If we were listing three areas where they want additional space we would need at least one comma, and I would argue for the Oxford comma as well, however we are only listing two areas where we want more space and so no comma is needed.

    Sure it’s nearly unreadable, but I think the punctuation is correct.



  • Because if we were all somewhere else, you would be asking the same question about that place.

    “This is rather as if you imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, ‘This is an interesting world I find myself in — an interesting hole I find myself in — fits me rather neatly, doesn’t it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!’ This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, frantically hanging on to the notion that everything’s going to be alright, because this world was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise. I think this may be something we need to be on the watch out for.”








  • UmeU@lemmy.worldtoScience Memes@mander.xyzThe 1900s
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    16 days ago

    That’s a long and boring response.

    The evidence that no one can live past 123 is that no one has ever lived past 123. We have a sample size of billions on that statistic.

    Some low quality science journal says that ‘maybe we could live forever, or like, 150 or something’ and I say ‘cool story bro’.

    I can imagine that it might be true, but that does not make it possible.

    Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

    People like you are why Iemmy is almost as bad as Reddit… talking in circles, saying nothing.


  • UmeU@lemmy.worldtoScience Memes@mander.xyzThe 1900s
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 days ago

    Please forgive me if I have misunderstood you.

    I am not sure what relevance ‘pop-science’ has unless pop science means non science.

    I get that you are saying ‘maybe, possibly, not completely ridiculous to think’, etc., however until it has been demonstrated to be a possibility, the idea that a human might live until 150 is just about as preposterous as the articles’ postulation of the potential for physical immortality.

    Something which is evidenced to be not possible does not suddenly become ‘possible’ just because one can imagine it.