JMFC?

[Guest]

Do any of you guys even like Jungle or am I associating the name with something completely different?

 

Some do perhaps. Its more because its based in Rio I think.

[Guest]

Saying one thing while meaning another is pretty much exactly the definition of irony.

 

Does the size and power of JMFC make you

 

 

Jealous

Much?

Feeling

Crabby?

 

Jokes

May

Feel

Childish

 

but they're helping all the slandered JMFC members get through these troubled times, try not to take anything personally

[Guest]

I was thinking this...

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/93/218636644_f4ca086a14_m.jpg

 

You guys meant this...

http://www.ptksf.com/album/2008%20Licensure%20Course%20Philippines/100_5073.JPG

 

Gotcha.

[Guest]

Gotcha.

 

Nah I think we mean more like this unfortunately:

 

http://workspacebrussels.net/usr/workspace/WTF3/img_projects/GenderJungle_BettinaFrenzel.jpg

[Guest]

lol

[Duxwig]

Ok, we like these threads. I offered to speak in private because I think you are really trying your best to 'get' us, and thats neat of you.

 

Small post, just to edge you in the right direction. Numbers are rough and stuff because I am not searching through every page of JMFC info and making them 100% accurate. Ill leave that to anyone who has a problem with what Im saying.

 

- We have 14 gyms. 9 In Rio, 5 outside. These are all elite gyms (bar one or two). That services about 1000 members in total. Half of those are not in JMFC, perhaps more than that. We probably have more good elite gyms in Rio than every other city (dont quote me on that though, I might be talking crap now).

 

- We have 7 (I think) fight orgs. 3 In Rio and 4 elsewhere. They serve probably another 1500 people (give or take). Some are new starts in new cities, but some are actually very good and are experienced orgs. Most of our good orgs put on events, like the Hypertyphoon or weight tournaments with substantial prizes. You can see some of the forum threads that were made about them, personally I think the HyperTyphoon was the funniest contest Ive seen here.

 

- We have 5 Supp companies, spread all over (only 1 in Rio). They all produce top quality products fairly fast because we can fund them. They do not only serve our purpose, but help everywhere they go (see the post about Arashi). I cant go and say how many people use these services but I bet its a decent amount.

 

- We have 4 Clothing companies (mostly in Rio). I personally own one and have worked with people all over the game in many cities, I do not just work for other JMFC people. My thread has died down over xmas and I stopped taking requests because I was working a lot. Generally I would say we have some good artists and the quality of our work is good or better.

 

That is just businesses. Take that as you will (some could argue that that is not important). If its fighters you want to know about let me help you...

 

We have managers ranging from 10000th to 10th, our average win/loss is so low because we have new players who havent had time to get good at the game. Our top tier guys are as good as anyone elses (bar perhaps a couple of people like Avon). We will be fighting TFP sometime soon and I hope to show you all what I mean then. As an aside one of our best and brightest just bet Johnny Cage, one of the Pits best. Looking through the top ranked fighters I see quite a few fighters belonging to JMFC.

 

Or how about members and money?

 

Now our alliance. We take in people from our community regardless of skill or knowledge and support them in learning how to play. We have 72 members right now, by my estimates we have probably seen 100 members worth of JMFC people. Thats 100 accounts who have come and played, and more important bought VIP(and possibly extra slots as well). We support this game from the ground up. We also pay our way. If I have my way we will have over 100 active members by the end of this year, perhaps more.

 

Our reach is quite far, our numbers are high. Our worth is in my humble opinion is a lot. There are 10k people in this game, we have probably had meaningful interaction with perhaps 1/3rd of those people. What other alliance can say that? We didnt come here and toot our own horn until people (quite rightly) said they didnt know who we are. Well now you get a thread a week asking who we are (what other alliance can say that either). Do we think we are the best? Probably, is it justified, very possibly. Are we saying the rest of you are shit? Not at all.

 

But excuse us if we dont feel like explaining ourselves every time it comes up

 

People dont wanna read shit like this because it looks like im bragging. These are the facts as I see them. I actually ended up posting a lot more than I would have. I wont say any more than that just now, Ive probably already said too much. Feel free to contact me privately if you dont agree with me or want to know something Ive missed.

 

If anyone asks who we are, we say 'That WoW raiding guild'. Or to the rest of you 'The Bad Guys'

 

God damn TDB, you killed the thread!

 

[Guest]

Also, that isn't irony.

 

Verbal irony. It's often referred to as sarcasm, although in colloquial English the word "sarcasm" tends to have a sardonic or wry connotation, which I wanted to avoid as my ribbing is good-natured, thus referring to it simply as irony.

[overthetop2]

Verbal irony. It's often referred to as sarcasm, although in colloquial English the word "sarcasm" tends to have a sardonic or wry connotation, which I wanted to avoid as my ribbing is good-natured, thus referring to it simply as irony.

Ok, let's see if you understand this: FUCK OFF GRAMMAR POLICE!

[Guest]

Do any of you guys even like Jungle or am I associating the name with something completely different?

 

 

One of my guys comes out to a Black Sun Empire track. Another one used to come out to Future prophecies. Another noisea.

[Guest]

You're completely wrong on all accounts. In English, regardless of the dialect (pidgin doesn't count), you may not end a sentence with a preposition.

 

http://grammartips.homestead.com/prepositions1.html

http://grammar.about.com/b/2008/03/26/prep...tences-with.htm

http://www.grammarmudge.cityslide.com/arti...026513/8910.htm

http://www.dailywritingtips.com/go-ahead-p...ion-at-the-end/

 

People will like you better if you're not a douche about something you're clearly wrong about.

 

More the internet is serious the English language than us to.

 

And that's just horrible sentence structure overall. Nice job trying to exaggerate my stupidity by mocking me, but you're really just making yourself look like an idiotic jackass. And I never claimed to be an articulate writer, because I know I lack clarity at times, just a natural one. There is a difference.

 

You might be trying to be "good-natured" about all of this, but in my opinion you're failing. You've insulted my intelligence, my ability to even form thoughts, and then you mocked me. Where I come from those aren't good-natured actions, especially considering my initial response to you was nothing more than an explanation as to why you were wrong.

 

No big paragraphs, just for you.

 

Ok, we like these threads. I offered to speak in private because I think you are really trying your best to 'get' us, and thats neat of you.

 

etc.

 

I'm surprised you guys don't have more companies with your 70+ membership, actually, but I am impressed with the amount of companies you have outside of Rio. Whether or not those companies are good companies is a different story, but I'm not going to argue that they aren't because I have no proof or notion of that. I do think fighters are an important part of an alliance, considering this is a managing simulator, but you don't have to prove anything else to me. There are more advantages that come with being a large alliance than having the numbers to help determine the outcome of a poll, and I guess I was overlooking them out of bias.

 

And, in all fairness, you guys gave up on explaining yourselves early on. I'm not going to say you weren't justified in doing so, because that's not my place, but a lot of the stuff concerning you guys could have been avoided had you not.

[Guest]

One of my guys comes out to a Black Sun Empire track. Another one used to come out to Future prophecies. Another noisea.

 

We have a winner!

 

[Guest]

God damn TDB, you killed the thread!

 

Yeah sorry mate (Now remove the quote and it will be like that post never existed...)

 

We need more fun posts up in here.

 

Edit: Tats, post me some good jungle songs please (if you do indeed like that stuff). I dont know much about it personally.

 

 

And, in all fairness, you guys gave up on explaining yourselves early on. I'm not going to say you weren't justified in doing so, because that's not my place, but a lot of the stuff concerning you guys could have been avoided had you not.

 

What you say may be a fair, but where is the fun in that?

[Guest]

post me some good jungle songs please

 

Here ya go!

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHSOiCIg0l0

 

[Guest]

Gimpy bringing out the old skool!

 

If you're really interested macleana youtube is your friend...jungle has a ton of genres and sub-genres (I stopped keeping track of them).

 

Some personal faves include (just to give you an idea of the different sounds).

 

Alien Girl

 

 

[Guest]

Is it still Jungle if they aren't

[Guest]

Dude, check out the bands I mentioned. Add Photek and Future Prophecies to the list. Killer, killer stuff.

[Guest]

http://grammartips.homestead.com/prepositions1.html

http://grammar.about.com/b/2008/03/26/prep...tences-with.htm

http://www.grammarmudge.cityslide.com/arti...026513/8910.htm

http://www.dailywritingtips.com/go-ahead-p...ion-at-the-end/

 

People will like you better if you're not a douche about something you're clearly wrong about.

 

All of these articles are about colloquial usage of the terminal preposition. I'm in fact not clearly wrong. Next you're going to tell me I can use double negatives because "ain't no" is acceptable in colloquial English. Common usage and proper usage are not equal.

 

Not to mention that none of these links are scholarly sources. You'll need to find a well cited and peer-reviewed paper proving a definitive historical usage of the terminal preposition in proper spoken English from its inception before you tell me I'm wrong. That, as the about.com article says, commonfolk used the language improperly even 300 years ago is not an argument for its properness in modern language. It is only a proof that people have been articulating themselves poorly for a long time.

 

Perhaps you're right, however. I shall immediately quit my job teaching grammar and mechanics to college students and go back to high school to learn how to talk good n stuff.

[Guest]

Oh, you're a teacher. No wonder you're a douche who can't admit they're wrong. Believe it or not, just because you have a teaching degree doesn't make you infallible, even if it is concerning matters of your chosen field of teaching.

 

If I do bother to find such a paper, how hard would it be for you to tell me that it wasn't cited well enough, that the peers who reviewed it weren't qualified, and that it wasn't about proper English? And that about.com article cites Merriam-Webster's Concise Dictionary of English Usage, published in 2002, and The American Heritage Book of English Usage, published in 1996, with direct quotes. Those sources aren't good enough for you?

 

And, apparently you've failed to grasp the concept that the "rule" you're arguing for is derived from a Latin rule much older than the "commonfolk" you speak of. First of all, proof that it's commonfolk who are at fault would be nice, and even then, why should something as old as Latin have an impact on language today if how it was used 300 years ago doesn't? In fact, I can't even find the section of the article you're referring to, so how about you quote it directly?

 

Furthermore, why would I be using formal, or proper, English right now? I'm not writing a paper, I'm speaking to other people on a forum for a game.

 

I do encourage you to quit your job, by the way. I'm sure your students will be more than happy to see you go, considering I'm sure you're as much of a prick when you're not in front of a computer.

[Guest]

 

Somebody throw a chair!

[overthetop2]

All of these articles are about colloquial usage of the terminal preposition. I'm in fact not clearly wrong. Next you're going to tell me I can use double negatives because "ain't no" is acceptable in colloquial English. Common usage and proper usage are not equal.

 

Not to mention that none of these links are scholarly sources. You'll need to find a well cited and peer-reviewed paper proving a definitive historical usage of the terminal preposition in proper spoken English from its inception before you tell me I'm wrong. That, as the about.com article says, commonfolk used the language improperly even 300 years ago is not an argument for its properness in modern language. It is only a proof that people have been articulating themselves poorly for a long time.

 

Perhaps you're right, however. I shall immediately quit my job teaching grammar and mechanics to college students and go back to high school to learn how to talk good n stuff.

What part of fuck off did you not understand?

[Guest]

Oh, you're a teacher. No wonder you're a douche who can't admit they're wrong. Believe it or not, just because you have a teaching degree doesn't make you infallible, even if it is concerning matters of your chosen field of teaching.

 

If I do bother to find such a paper, how hard would it be for you to tell me that it wasn't cited well enough, that the peers who reviewed it weren't qualified, and that it wasn't about proper English? And that about.com article cites Merriam-Webster's Concise Dictionary of English Usage, published in 2002, and The American Heritage Book of English Usage, published in 1996, with direct quotes. Those sources aren't good enough for you?

 

And, apparently you've failed to grasp the concept that the "rule" you're arguing for is derived from a Latin rule much older than the "commonfolk" you speak of. First of all, proof that it's commonfolk who are at fault would be nice, and even then, why should something as old as Latin have an impact on language today if how it was used 300 years ago doesn't? In fact, I can't even find the section of the article you're referring to, so how about you quote it directly?

 

Furthermore, why would I be using formal, or proper, English right now? I'm not writing a paper, I'm speaking to other people on a forum for a game.

 

I do encourage you to quit your job, by the way. I'm sure your students will be more than happy to see you go, considering I'm sure you're as much of a prick when you're not in front of a computer.

 

How do you derive a rule for preposition usage from Latin, a language in which the prepositions are built into the nouns and verbs through their endings? There's a reason that Latin has so many more endings for words than English, and it's precisely to avoid the kind of imprecision that results from having words integral to meaning able to float about the sentence mucking things up. The Romans were also wise enough to build the infinitive into the verb so people couldn't split it and obscure meaning even more.

 

Justifying

Many

Foolish

Colloquialisms.

 

I'm out.

[Guest]

In Latin prepositions aren't built into the nouns and verbs. The nouns and verbs have endings which indicate whether or not it is connected to the preposition.

 

My Latin is a bit rusty, and I didn't study it for long, so this is going to be pretty simplistic. "Amico cum ambulo" means "I walk with a friend." Ambulare means to walk, the ending "o" signifies it is in the first person, cum means with, the preposition, and amicus means friend, which is in the dative so that you know it is the direct object "ambulo cum" is working with.

 

The Romans were also wise enough to use lead in the construction of their aqueducts. Not exactly the people you want to emulate, although I will say I do admire some things about the Roman culture.

 

One thing I've been noticing is that you have done nothing to back up your claims, while I've posted examples and sources, and the only thing you can say in response is that my examples are wrong and the sources aren't credible enough for you.

 

Here is what a few college websites and other college professors think on the subject, and I'll quote instead of just providing the link just to make it easier for you:

 

Along with split infinitives, a favorite bugbear of the traditionalists. Whatever the merit of the rule — and both historically and logically, there's not much — there's a substantial body of opinion against end-of-sentence prepositions; if you want to keep the crusty old-timers happy, try to avoid ending written sentences (and clauses) with prepositions, such as to, with, from, at, and in. Instead of writing "The topics we want to write on," where the preposition on ends the clause, consider "The topics on which we want to write." Prepositions should usually go before (pre-position) the words they modify.

 

On the other hand — and it's a big other hand — old-timers shouldn't always dictate your writing, and you don't deserve your writing license if you elevate this rough guideline into a superstition. Don't let it make your writing clumsy or obscure; if a sentence is more graceful with a final preposition, let it stand. For instance, "He gave the public what it longed for" is clear and idiomatic, even though it ends with a preposition; "He gave the public that for which it longed" avoids the problem but doesn't look like English. A sentence becomes unnecessarily obscure when it's filled with from whoms and with whiches. According to a widely circulated (and often mutated) story, Winston Churchill, reprimanded for ending a sentence with a preposition, put it best: "This is the sort of thing up with which I will not put."

 

http://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Writi...ml#prepositions

 

In other words, this rule has been imported from Latin into English with no valid reasoning behind its importation. Latin words have different endings showing their various cases and meanings depending on the role they play in a certain sentence. They can be moved around within a sentence without changing the meaning of that sentence. However, the one word that should not be placed at the end of a Latin sentence is a preposition. However, English does not work in the same way, and English words do not have the various endings as in Latin.

 

http://www.columbiaseminary.edu/coffeetalk/050.html

 

Should I end a sentence with a preposition?

 

The so-called "rule" about never ending a sentence with a preposition comes from Latin grammar. In Latin, the word order of a sentence didn't matter; subjects and verbs and direct objects could appear in any sequence. However, the placement of prepositions was important. Latin sentences could quickly become confusing if the preposition does not appear immediately before the object of the preposition, so it became a stylistic rule for Latin writers to have objects always and immediately following prepositions. That meant a sentence would never end with a preposition.

 

When English grammarians in the 1500s and 1600s starting writing grammar books, they frequently applied Latin rules to English, even though those rules had never been applicable before. They wanted to make English more like Latin, which had a reputation for being logical and eloquent while English was still trying to gain acceptance as a scholarly language. One grammarian even applied mathematical rules to English, such as the idea of a "double negative" becoming a "positive," which certainly made sense in algebra, in a "(-2) x (-2) = +4" kind of a way, but this idea was completely new-fangled in English. English for centuries had been merrily using double negatives and ending sentences with prepositions before that time without anyone complaining, yet now it is grammatical law!

 

In the daily speech of British folk, the most common dialects still conform to this rule. The British tend to say, "To what place was the package sent?" or "For what purpose is that machine made?" On the other hand, in many U.S. dialects, it is a common Americanism to say, "What place was the package sent to?" or "What is that machine for?" These phrasings sound acceptable (but a little low class) to most Americans, and it is probably permissible to go ahead and end the sentence with a preposition in informal writing. In more formal writing, or when writing for a British audience, it might be wise to go ahead and follow the rule (even if it is artificial). The most important tip is to avoid sentences that sound awkward or confuse the reader. An editor supposedly chastised one writer, variously said to be Mark Twain or Winston Churchill, for ending a sentence with a preposition. The author retorted, "Ending a sentence with a preposition is something up with which I will not put." His retort neatly illustrates the point that slavishly following grammatical rules can be just as devastating to good taste as breaking the rules for the sake of clarity and style. Always make the choice that avoids the awkward sentence.

 

http://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/documents/Prepositions.pdf

[Guest]

What part of fuck off did you not understand?

 

Until you say it in the proper sentence structure he can ignore it. Havent you seen 'The Rules of the Internet'?

 

ps Thanks for the links people, checking them out now.

[Guest]

In Latin prepositions aren't built into the nouns and verbs. The nouns and verbs have endings which indicate whether or not it is connected to the preposition.

 

My Latin is a bit rusty, and I didn't study it for long, so this is going to be pretty simplistic. "Amico cum ambulo" means "I walk with a friend." Ambulare means to walk, the ending "o" signifies it is in the first person, cum means with, the preposition, and amicus means friend, which is in the dative so that you know it is the direct object "ambulo cum" is working with.

 

The Romans were also wise enough to use lead in the construction of their aqueducts. Not exactly the people you want to emulate, although I will say I do admire some things about the Roman culture.

 

One thing I've been noticing is that you have done nothing to back up your claims, while I've posted examples and sources, and the only thing you can say in response is that my examples are wrong and the sources aren't credible enough for you.

 

Here is what a few college websites and other college professors think on the subject, and I'll quote instead of just providing the link just to make it easier for you:

why do you care so much about what someone on the internet says about your grammar as to have done all this research?

 

[Guest]

Five or so minutes of Google searches plus however long it takes me to read the material isn't a lot of research, especially when it's nearly one in the morning, I can't sleep, and I have nothing else to do but watch TV. And I like to be corrected if I'm wrong, so I might as well do the same for others. I do highly doubt his claim of "teaching grammar and mechanics to college students", but if that's true it's even more of a reason to correct him, otherwise he will be passing on the wrong information to many other people, although it is doubtful that someone on the internet telling him that he's wrong will change what he teaches, I might as well try.