Photographer
FIFTYONE PHOTOGRAPHY
Posts: 6597
Uniontown, Pennsylvania, US
Top o' the page!! Paolo D Photography wrote:
dudes, this thread is a year old
[snip] 10 months
Photographer
Paolo D Photography
Posts: 11502
San Francisco, California, US
FIFTYONE PHOTOGRAPHY wrote:
Top o' the page!!
10 months Jan. 09th 2020 is when it was born.
As of Jan.17th 2021 thats a year and little more than a week where I come from.
This has nothing to do with the topic anymore, but only further confirms my suspicion that people somehow can't comprehend thread dates when posting.
interesting phenomenon
Photographer
Mark Salo
Posts: 11735
Olney, Maryland, US
Paolo D Photography wrote:
Jan. 09th 2020 is when it was born.
As of Jan.17th 2021 thats a year and little more than a week where I come from.
This has nothing to do with the topic anymore, but only further confirms my suspicion that people somehow can't comprehend thread dates when posting.
interesting phenomenon Paolo, I notice that you posted to this thread previously (but then your post was hidden).
Photographer
Paolo D Photography
Posts: 11502
San Francisco, California, US
Mark Salo wrote:
Paolo, I notice that you posted to this thread previously (but then your post was hidden). if you were curious: I quoted the person who pointlessly bumped the thread and complained about a model. I removed the models # from the quote, but perhaps that was overlooked by a mod and so my post was hidden too. Basically I just said outing was against forum rules in my reply.
Photographer
Shot By Adam
Posts: 8098
Las Vegas, Nevada, US
Giralt Photography wrote:
I believe their sincerity and take them at their word. Uh huh.
On a side note, interestingly enough, did you know that the word "gullible" is actually not in the English dictionary? It's one of those weird things that's actually true.
Photographer
Mark Salo
Posts: 11735
Olney, Maryland, US
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gullible "Yes, it's entered as a run-on at our entry for "gullible," along with "gullibly." All three of these words descend from the verb gull, meaning "to deceive or take advantage of." The verb "gull" was borrowed into English from Anglo-French in the mid-16th century."
Clothing Designer
veypurr
Posts: 464
Albuquerque, New Mexico, US
Mark Salo wrote:
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gullible
"Yes, it's entered as a run-on at our entry for "gullible," along with "gullibly." All three of these words descend from the verb gull, meaning "to deceive or take advantage of." The verb "gull" was borrowed into English from Anglo-French in the mid-16th century." A Gull is a bird. My favorite bird is a Blue Jay. New Mexico doesn't have very colorful birds but there were Blue Jays at my grandfather's ranch.
Photographer
Rob Photosby
Posts: 4810
Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
Shot By Adam wrote:
Uh huh.
On a side note, interestingly enough, did you know that the word "gullible" is actually not in the English dictionary? It's one of those weird things that's actually true. Wow! You really ought to let the Oxford dictionary know that!
https://www.lexico.com/definition/gullible
Photographer
FIFTYONE PHOTOGRAPHY
Posts: 6597
Uniontown, Pennsylvania, US
veypurr wrote:
A Gull is a bird. My favorite bird is a Blue Jay. New Mexico doesn't have very colorful birds but there were Blue Jays at my grandfather's ranch. The Irish consider it good luck when a Bird craps on You.
|
|
|
