Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
268 bytes added ,  23:48, April 10, 2007
Line 50: Line 50:  
5. This controversy, and the even more asinine one on “American spellings”, seems to have provided the requisite steam power for blow-hards to arouse themselves to elevated levels of indignation and over what most other folk would perceive to be trifling matters of custom, protocol and etiquette. Here too, I would recommend adhering to American spelling, which is invariably simpler and more logical. But where would Conservapedia be if the Liberals relented on such epochal issues?  
 
5. This controversy, and the even more asinine one on “American spellings”, seems to have provided the requisite steam power for blow-hards to arouse themselves to elevated levels of indignation and over what most other folk would perceive to be trifling matters of custom, protocol and etiquette. Here too, I would recommend adhering to American spelling, which is invariably simpler and more logical. But where would Conservapedia be if the Liberals relented on such epochal issues?  
 
88888888888888888888888888888888
 
88888888888888888888888888888888
 +
 +
:One thing: how exactly is American spelling of English more logical or simple than any other spelling?  "Organize" vs. "Organise."  I'm having trouble seeing how logic applies.  Bigotry, maybe.  You're a moron.  --[[User:Eatsilk|Eatsilk]] 19:48, 10 April 2007 (EDT)
     
7

edits

Navigation menu