View Single Post
Old 2006-05-21, 14:40   #13
xilman
Bamboozled!
 
xilman's Avatar
 
"π’‰Ίπ’ŒŒπ’‡·π’†·π’€­"
May 2003
Down not across

22×3×941 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TTn
The words of the constitution in question were meant to be interpreted only in certain ways to avoid, or establish ambiguities. These words are a guiding factor(supervision) to those who read it several times through for different meanings.
As a citizen of said constitution, certain rights that I find to be infringed will be defended.
Ah, things are becoming very slightly clearer now. I was misled by your poor grasp of English grammar and it begins to appear that Bob's analysis may be more accurate than I had previously accepted.

In the form of English with which I am familiar, the verb "to supervise"requires that an active participant partake of the supervision. A person or group of people, or even an animal, may supervise but an intellectual construct can not actively participate in that role.

I suggest that you meant to say something along the lines of: "I believe further contributions to this sub-forum wil violate my rights granted to me under the US constitution".

That formulation is just as ridiculously pompous as your original, but at least it has the benefit of clarity.


Paul

Last fiddled with by xilman on 2006-05-21 at 14:41
xilman is online now