▲ 1292 ▼ "Weak men create hard times" (lemmy.ml) submitted 2 years ago* by Confidant6198@lemmy.ml to c/memes@lemmy.ml 128 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] guillem@aussie.zone 88 points 2 years ago (19 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source hideshow 19 child comments replies: [–] dumbass@leminal.space 60 points 2 years ago (7 children) Here, have a Pepsi. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] Irinir@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago (4 children) It's all I wanted. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] NakariLexfortaine@lemm.ee 5 points 2 years ago (3 children) You know he's never going to give it to you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] ICastFist@programming.dev 4 points 2 years ago* (1 child) But you just know that he's never gonna give you up permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] lord_ryvan@ttrpg.network 2 points 2 years ago Or let you down. Or run around, as a matter of fact. permalink fedilink source parent [–] dumbass@leminal.space 3 points 2 years ago Not even one. permalink fedilink source parent [–] klemptor@startrek.website 9 points 2 years ago (1 child) Pepsi Kona for me please permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] dumbass@leminal.space 3 points 2 years ago There ya go. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Hobbes_Dent@lemmy.world 33 points 2 years ago (1 child) I was gonna post that but then I was, like, whatever. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] balderdash9@lemmy.zip 1 point 2 years ago Silent as per usual permalink fedilink source parent [–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago (7 children) Only thing that isn't okay is to mangle your sentence to conform to the obsolete "never end a sentence with a preposition because some old fogey said so hundreds of years ago" rule 😛 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] TheRedSpade@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago (1 child) I'm ok with ignoring this rule. Most of us do anyway. While we're at it, can we also put "never split the infinitive" on the chopping block? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago Yes, please! permalink fedilink source parent [+] guillem@aussie.zone 6 points 2 years ago (4 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 years ago It's an invented prescriptionist rule that was imported from studying Latin. You can completely ignore it and you'll get more natural sounding language. permalink fedilink source parent [–] psud@aussie.zone 2 points 2 years ago What you wrote was fine. Some people don't like that sentence structure for stupid reasons permalink fedilink source parent [–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Same here. There's probably other ways too, but personally I'd probably have gone with "and we're okay with that" or "and that's fine/okay with us". Just flows more like naturally IMO. BTW, in spite of the tongue in cheek way in which I said it, I meant no personal ill will towards you. Just the rule and its tyranny 😉 permalink fedilink source parent [–] monotremata@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago It's the "with which we are okay" that sounds a little stilted. Most speakers would probably phrase that part of the sentence as "which we're okay with." It's just because "okay with" is so common that it almost feels like a transitive form of the verb "to be okay," so splitting apart sounds odd. Note that there's already a different transitive verb "okay" which means "approve" or "authorize," as in "the boss okayed your plan to use the forklift," implying that the person doing this has authority or control over whether the thing happens. "I'm okay with it" by contrast typically means something like "I have no control over it but it also doesn't trouble me." "Unfazed by" (spelled in this way, not related to "phase") would be a similar expression. permalink fedilink source parent [–] toddalon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 2 years ago Exactly the comment I was looking for. Tip of the hat to you. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] dumbass@leminal.space 60 points 2 years ago (7 children) Here, have a Pepsi. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] Irinir@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago (4 children) It's all I wanted. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] NakariLexfortaine@lemm.ee 5 points 2 years ago (3 children) You know he's never going to give it to you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] ICastFist@programming.dev 4 points 2 years ago* (1 child) But you just know that he's never gonna give you up permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] lord_ryvan@ttrpg.network 2 points 2 years ago Or let you down. Or run around, as a matter of fact. permalink fedilink source parent [–] dumbass@leminal.space 3 points 2 years ago Not even one. permalink fedilink source parent [–] klemptor@startrek.website 9 points 2 years ago (1 child) Pepsi Kona for me please permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] dumbass@leminal.space 3 points 2 years ago There ya go. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Irinir@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago (4 children) It's all I wanted. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] NakariLexfortaine@lemm.ee 5 points 2 years ago (3 children) You know he's never going to give it to you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] ICastFist@programming.dev 4 points 2 years ago* (1 child) But you just know that he's never gonna give you up permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] lord_ryvan@ttrpg.network 2 points 2 years ago Or let you down. Or run around, as a matter of fact. permalink fedilink source parent [–] dumbass@leminal.space 3 points 2 years ago Not even one. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] NakariLexfortaine@lemm.ee 5 points 2 years ago (3 children) You know he's never going to give it to you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] ICastFist@programming.dev 4 points 2 years ago* (1 child) But you just know that he's never gonna give you up permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] lord_ryvan@ttrpg.network 2 points 2 years ago Or let you down. Or run around, as a matter of fact. permalink fedilink source parent [–] dumbass@leminal.space 3 points 2 years ago Not even one. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 4 points 2 years ago* (1 child) But you just know that he's never gonna give you up permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] lord_ryvan@ttrpg.network 2 points 2 years ago Or let you down. Or run around, as a matter of fact. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] lord_ryvan@ttrpg.network 2 points 2 years ago Or let you down. Or run around, as a matter of fact. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] klemptor@startrek.website 9 points 2 years ago (1 child) Pepsi Kona for me please permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] dumbass@leminal.space 3 points 2 years ago There ya go. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Hobbes_Dent@lemmy.world 33 points 2 years ago (1 child) I was gonna post that but then I was, like, whatever. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] balderdash9@lemmy.zip 1 point 2 years ago Silent as per usual permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago (7 children) Only thing that isn't okay is to mangle your sentence to conform to the obsolete "never end a sentence with a preposition because some old fogey said so hundreds of years ago" rule 😛 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] TheRedSpade@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago (1 child) I'm ok with ignoring this rule. Most of us do anyway. While we're at it, can we also put "never split the infinitive" on the chopping block? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago Yes, please! permalink fedilink source parent [+] guillem@aussie.zone 6 points 2 years ago (4 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 years ago It's an invented prescriptionist rule that was imported from studying Latin. You can completely ignore it and you'll get more natural sounding language. permalink fedilink source parent [–] psud@aussie.zone 2 points 2 years ago What you wrote was fine. Some people don't like that sentence structure for stupid reasons permalink fedilink source parent [–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Same here. There's probably other ways too, but personally I'd probably have gone with "and we're okay with that" or "and that's fine/okay with us". Just flows more like naturally IMO. BTW, in spite of the tongue in cheek way in which I said it, I meant no personal ill will towards you. Just the rule and its tyranny 😉 permalink fedilink source parent [–] monotremata@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago It's the "with which we are okay" that sounds a little stilted. Most speakers would probably phrase that part of the sentence as "which we're okay with." It's just because "okay with" is so common that it almost feels like a transitive form of the verb "to be okay," so splitting apart sounds odd. Note that there's already a different transitive verb "okay" which means "approve" or "authorize," as in "the boss okayed your plan to use the forklift," implying that the person doing this has authority or control over whether the thing happens. "I'm okay with it" by contrast typically means something like "I have no control over it but it also doesn't trouble me." "Unfazed by" (spelled in this way, not related to "phase") would be a similar expression. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] TheRedSpade@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago (1 child) I'm ok with ignoring this rule. Most of us do anyway. While we're at it, can we also put "never split the infinitive" on the chopping block? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago Yes, please! permalink fedilink source parent
[+] guillem@aussie.zone 6 points 2 years ago (4 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 years ago It's an invented prescriptionist rule that was imported from studying Latin. You can completely ignore it and you'll get more natural sounding language. permalink fedilink source parent [–] psud@aussie.zone 2 points 2 years ago What you wrote was fine. Some people don't like that sentence structure for stupid reasons permalink fedilink source parent [–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Same here. There's probably other ways too, but personally I'd probably have gone with "and we're okay with that" or "and that's fine/okay with us". Just flows more like naturally IMO. BTW, in spite of the tongue in cheek way in which I said it, I meant no personal ill will towards you. Just the rule and its tyranny 😉 permalink fedilink source parent [–] monotremata@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago It's the "with which we are okay" that sounds a little stilted. Most speakers would probably phrase that part of the sentence as "which we're okay with." It's just because "okay with" is so common that it almost feels like a transitive form of the verb "to be okay," so splitting apart sounds odd. Note that there's already a different transitive verb "okay" which means "approve" or "authorize," as in "the boss okayed your plan to use the forklift," implying that the person doing this has authority or control over whether the thing happens. "I'm okay with it" by contrast typically means something like "I have no control over it but it also doesn't trouble me." "Unfazed by" (spelled in this way, not related to "phase") would be a similar expression. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 years ago It's an invented prescriptionist rule that was imported from studying Latin. You can completely ignore it and you'll get more natural sounding language. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] psud@aussie.zone 2 points 2 years ago What you wrote was fine. Some people don't like that sentence structure for stupid reasons permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Same here. There's probably other ways too, but personally I'd probably have gone with "and we're okay with that" or "and that's fine/okay with us". Just flows more like naturally IMO. BTW, in spite of the tongue in cheek way in which I said it, I meant no personal ill will towards you. Just the rule and its tyranny 😉 permalink fedilink source parent
[–] monotremata@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago It's the "with which we are okay" that sounds a little stilted. Most speakers would probably phrase that part of the sentence as "which we're okay with." It's just because "okay with" is so common that it almost feels like a transitive form of the verb "to be okay," so splitting apart sounds odd. Note that there's already a different transitive verb "okay" which means "approve" or "authorize," as in "the boss okayed your plan to use the forklift," implying that the person doing this has authority or control over whether the thing happens. "I'm okay with it" by contrast typically means something like "I have no control over it but it also doesn't trouble me." "Unfazed by" (spelled in this way, not related to "phase") would be a similar expression. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] toddalon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 2 years ago Exactly the comment I was looking for. Tip of the hat to you. permalink fedilink source parent