Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldEnglish · 7 个月前Stand your groundslrpnk.netimagemessage-square45fedilinkarrow-up1924arrow-down17
arrow-up1917arrow-down1imageStand your groundslrpnk.netTrack_Shovel@slrpnk.net to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldEnglish · 7 个月前message-square45fedilink
minus-squareatro_city@fedia.iolinkfedilinkarrow-up9·7 个月前Lotters? Is this some vernacular I’m unfamiliar with?
minus-squareFarid@startrek.websitelinkfedilinkarrow-up9·7 个月前They attempted to write “Loiters* will be shot* on sight”.
minus-squareTypotyper@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up11·7 个月前Or “Looters” Or “Lawyers” Or “Losers” Or maybe it really is “L’Otters”. Those radical left rascals causing mayhem and dissection in the workers.
minus-squareFarid@startrek.websitelinkfedilinkarrow-up1·7 个月前Yes, but we don’t know if that’s what they wanted to write. But in that case, maybe they also wanted to write “shoot” and not “shot”, so yeah, fair point.
minus-squareFarid@startrek.websitelinkfedilinkarrow-up2·7 个月前That’s what they tried to write, but to be lexically correct it should be “loiterers”.
Lotters? Is this some vernacular I’m unfamiliar with?
It says, in fact, LOπERS.
LOPIERS
WILL BE SH∞T ON SIGHT
They attempted to write “Loiters* will be shot* on sight”.
Or “Looters” Or “Lawyers” Or “Losers” Or maybe it really is “L’Otters”. Those radical left rascals causing mayhem and dissection in the workers.
Wouldn’t it be loiterers?
Yes, but we don’t know if that’s what they wanted to write. But in that case, maybe they also wanted to write “shoot” and not “shot”, so yeah, fair point.
And wouldn’t it be shooted?
LotRers.
Fans of Lord of the Rings.
What’s a loiter?
That’s what they tried to write, but to be lexically correct it should be “loiterers”.