You get to remove one word from the English language
- Thread starter Brendan Stepladder
- Start date
As I've probably seen Monty Python and the Holy Grail more times than is healthy, I choose "it".
"Bouncebackability"
You know why? BECAUSE IT'S NOT A FUCKING WORD! The only reason it's in the dictionary is because people are too fucking stupid to realise that we already have a fucking word for that. It's called RESILIENCE. Bouncebackability was only put in the dictionary because some twat said that if enough people used it they could get it put in the dictionary. THAT'S NOT AN APPROPRIATE CRITERION FOR PUTTING WORDS IN THE DICTIONARY!
You know why? BECAUSE IT'S NOT A FUCKING WORD! The only reason it's in the dictionary is because people are too fucking stupid to realise that we already have a fucking word for that. It's called RESILIENCE. Bouncebackability was only put in the dictionary because some twat said that if enough people used it they could get it put in the dictionary. THAT'S NOT AN APPROPRIATE CRITERION FOR PUTTING WORDS IN THE DICTIONARY!
I'd get rid of the word God. Because forcing Christian people to refer to him as 'beardy sky man' would make them even funnier.
But then people would just refer to you as 'that twat who banned his name' or 'ttwbhn.' And good luck pronouncing thatMortai Gravesend said:
I would ban a word that can't be replaced. I would ban the word 'a.' Not the letter a, just the word.
The only words that really annoy me are the ones that are misused a lot. I'd prefer people used them correctly rather than remove them completely.
But there's one word that's used in English, that isn't even an English word, and that's "schadenfreude". There already is an English word that means the same thing; "epicaricacy". It's a perfectly cromulent word, so why not use that instead of gratuitous German?
But there's one word that's used in English, that isn't even an English word, and that's "schadenfreude". There already is an English word that means the same thing; "epicaricacy". It's a perfectly cromulent word, so why not use that instead of gratuitous German?
I wanted to correct you about using "criteria" as a singular, but then you went and got it right. Way to ruin my fun.Shocksplicer said:
Entitled.
The internet lemmings will have to find a new word to use in defense of their corporation of choice.
The internet lemmings will have to find a new word to use in defense of their corporation of choice.
Best. (Or, barring that, Seven, to get FFVII fans to shut up)
No, seriously. I'm sick of forum topics about RPGs in other places with level 1 people who have clearly not played for 5 minutes demanding to know what nthe best everything is and how to get it ASAP. "Best" is subjective. Are you looking for the best damage output at the cost of 80% of your defense? Are you looking at the best support at the expense of some attack power? If there was one single setup that was the best for everything, it would be utterly pointless for anything else to exist, so why bother MAKING the rest of it exist!?
I want to ban this word from forums SO hard.
No, seriously. I'm sick of forum topics about RPGs in other places with level 1 people who have clearly not played for 5 minutes demanding to know what nthe best everything is and how to get it ASAP. "Best" is subjective. Are you looking for the best damage output at the cost of 80% of your defense? Are you looking at the best support at the expense of some attack power? If there was one single setup that was the best for everything, it would be utterly pointless for anything else to exist, so why bother MAKING the rest of it exist!?
I want to ban this word from forums SO hard.
...I think I'd get rid of...Hmm...Tough one...
No. I'd get rid of no. Y'know those types of people who just don't know how to say "no"? Now they really can't say no. Though, by technicality, they'd be able to say every synonym and altertive languages such as "non" or "Nein".
...Wait hang on...I just got the hidden aspects of that choice. Getting rid of No would be a catastrophe. So I'll get rid of "yes" instead. Much safer...I think
No. I'd get rid of no. Y'know those types of people who just don't know how to say "no"? Now they really can't say no. Though, by technicality, they'd be able to say every synonym and altertive languages such as "non" or "Nein".
...Wait hang on...I just got the hidden aspects of that choice. Getting rid of No would be a catastrophe. So I'll get rid of "yes" instead. Much safer...I think
