• NC Software is proud to announce the release of APDL - Airline Pilot Logbook version 10.0. Click here to view APDL on the Apple App store and install now.

Flightinfo board crash

Neal

Forums Chief Pilot
Staff member
Joined
Oct 31, 1996
Posts
289
Total Time
3000
We had to restore the database as we had an unrecoverable failure today. Flightinfo.com apologizes for the inconvenience.
 

Rez O. Lewshun

Save the Profession
Joined
Jan 19, 2004
Posts
13,422
Total Time
X>X
Thanks.... The dead horses that have been lost will be found..... not to worry!! The beatings will continue.


p.s. chperplt.....sorry 'bout tonight....NYY went nuts!
 

UnAnswerd

Activity Terminated
Joined
Sep 13, 2004
Posts
607
Total Time
NA
The withdrawal symptoms left me sweating and shaking. Glad to be back, and thanks for such an addictive board.

 

chperplt

Registered User
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
4,123
Total Time
.
Rez,

No need to be sorry.... Like I said before, it's going to be a great month of baseball. If you look at the last 3 series with the Rays, I believe the Yanks have won game 1 each time and then nada... Let's hope they lose the next 3 (I think)...

I really hope it comes down to the final weekend in Boston. Irregardless of who wins, it would be great ball.
 

banned username 2

Banned
Banned User
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
3,254
chperplt said:
Irregardless of who wins, it would be great ball.
Ok, I gotta nit-pick this one... Since I have seen TWO posts tonight from you that have used this word... "Irregardless" isn't a word, it is in itself a double-negative... The proper word for what you are trying to say is "regardless"...

Sorry... Pet-peeve...
 

English

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
3,374
Total Time
1
Everything deleted since 9/11, eh?

Too bad...I had -

Posted my name
Posted my picture


and revealed 350DRIVER's true identity.

You all missed it!
 

jetalc

Button Pusher
Joined
Dec 7, 2003
Posts
312
Total Time
15000+
Change your pet peeves, Professor.

Falcon Capt said:
Ok, I gotta nit-pick this one... Since I have seen TWO posts tonight from you that have used this word... "Irregardless" isn't a word, it is in itself a double-negative... The proper word for what you are trying to say is "regardless"...

Sorry... Pet-peeve...

irregardless

adv : regardless; a combination of irrespective and regardless sometimes used humorously

Try www.dictionary.com. Unfortunately, it IS a word, however wretched it sounds.
 

Hung Start

Just the cleanup guy
Joined
Sep 12, 2004
Posts
701
Total Time
enough
Spellin

Glad we are back to the same old crapola. :)

And, the Yankees STILL suck.
 

TonyC

Frederick's Happy Face
Joined
Oct 21, 2002
Posts
3,050
Total Time
>8,000
Falcon Capt said:
Ok, I gotta nit-pick this one... Since I have seen TWO posts tonight from you that have used this word... "Irregardless" isn't a word, it is in itself a double-negative... The proper word for what you are trying to say is "regardless"...

Sorry... Pet-peeve...
Fortunately, the Flightinfo board crash (see, I got the thread back on track :) ) didn't delete threads like Aggrivating Speech Faux Pa's (entertainment only) where we discussed, among other things, irregardless, and Any Pet Peeves? where we shared those things that annoy us.


Speaking of peeves... What exactly does "pet peeve" mean, anyway?

One might think that the meaning could be derived by looking at the word pet and the word peeve, and associating those two definitions. Looking first at the noun, peeve, we find it to be an irritant, an annoyance. It can be a particular grievance or source of aggravation. On this point, I believe we all agree. A peeve is something we'd just as soon not have to deal with. The adjective pet, on the other hand, gives us a bit more difficulty.

One meaning of the adjective pet is favorite. We've heard of the term "teacher's pet," that is, the teacher's favorite. Someone's pet cause is their favorite cause. My pet project is the one that consumes the most time. In that case, a pet peeve would be the favorite peeve, or perhaps the one that holds the premier position in the hierarchy of peeves. It would seem that many people consider this to be the proper application of the word when the context of their conversation lends credence to the proposition that the peeve in question is the most annoying thing they have ever dealt with. They may have many peeves, but there is only one pet peeve. Of course, this usage is confused when the context of usage indicates that the speaker, or writer as the case may be, holds this particular peeve up to be the most annoying of all, but then numbers many others that are the most annoying of all. Obviously, there can be only one that is most annoying.

On the other hand, the word pet can mean petty, insignificant, minor, or lower rank. In this case, the pet peeves could easily number in the thousands, as there are certainly that many things we encounter each day that can be somewhat annoying. One might have a long, long list of those things about which they frequently complain. Certainly, a pilot's list would be longer than most (keepin' it aviation related ;)).

Ironic it is, then, that the word pet can be construed to mean two different things that have almost opposite meanings. One other alternative is to turn to Webster for, perhaps, a unique definition for the two words combined. Indeed, Webster does have an entry for "pet peeve" : a frequent subject of complaint. Unfortunately, it doesn't really clarify the issue. While "frequent" tells us how often it arises, it does not help us determine whether it is the most important, or just one of many minor aggravations.

So, the quandry lies is knowing which definition a particular speaker intends to employ. Is this annoyance to which he refers the most annoying thing to him, or is it just one in a long list? If he mentions only one, the task of discerning becomes that much more difficult. Further, could it be that he has a long list of pet peeves (minor annoyances) and yet still has a single pet peeve (the one that annoys him most)?

I'll bet you haven't given that much thought to pet peeve in a while, have you?

:)

Either way, pet peeve is not hyphenated. Double negative is not hyphenated. Oh, and while nit-picking is hyphenated, nit pick is not.


:D




.
 

banned username 2

Banned
Banned User
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
3,254
jetalc said:
irregardless

adv : regardless; a combination of irrespective and regardless sometimes used humorously

Try www.dictionary.com. Unfortunately, it IS a word, however wretched it sounds.
Let's see "the rest of the story" (sorry Paul Harvey) about what Dictionary.com has to say about "irregardless", shall we?

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=irregardless&db

ir·re·gard·less ([font=verdana, sans-serif] P [/font]) Pronunciation Key (
r
-gärd
l
s)
adv. Nonstandard Regardless.


[Probably blend of irrespective, and regardless.]
Usage Note: Irregardless is a word that many mistakenly believe to be correct usage in formal style, when in fact it is used chiefly in nonstandard speech or casual writing. Coined in the United States in the early 20th century, it has met with a blizzard of condemnation for being an improper yoking of irrespective and regardless and for the logical absurdity of combining the negative ir- prefix and -less suffix in a single term. Although one might reasonably argue that it is no different from words with redundant affixes like debone and unravel, it has been considered a blunder for decades and will probably continue to be so.
 

chperplt

Registered User
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
4,123
Total Time
.
Falcon Capt said:
Ok, I gotta nit-pick this one... Since I have seen TWO posts tonight from you that have used this word... "Irregardless" isn't a word, it is in itself a double-negative... The proper word for what you are trying to say is "regardless"...

Sorry... Pet-peeve...


Why bother to PM me with this if you're going to post it on the board?

The fact is you need to read further in your quick google or ask.com search. The word may not be ideal, but the fact remains that it is still a word.

You may have a problem with people using the word, but the word is in the dictionary nonetheless.
 

TonyC

Frederick's Happy Face
Joined
Oct 21, 2002
Posts
3,050
Total Time
>8,000
Falcon Capt said:
Let's see "the rest of the story" (sorry Paul Harvey) about what Dictionary.com has to say about "irregardless", shall we?
I don't think he was trying to make a case for the legitimacy of the word or its proper usage. Rather, he simply responded to your simple assertion that "irregardless" is not a word. By way of reminder,
Falcon Capt said:
"Irregardless" isn't a word,...

Presenting a definition from Dictionary.com, he proved that claim false.

Now, we can argue all day long about whether it should or should not be used, but the fact remains it is a word.

In fact, this very issue (is it a word?) is addressed in the Dictionary.com definition, and in Merriam-Webster's definition:
Main Entry: ir·re·gard·less [url="http://www.m-w.com/images/audio.gif"]http://www.m-w.com/images/audio.gif[/url]
Pronunciation: "ir-i-'gärd-l&s
Function: adverb
Etymology: probably blend of irrespective and regardless
nonstandard : [size=-1]REGARDLESS[/size]
usage Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that "there is no such word." There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose.

emp. added

While it has been condemned for its logical absurdity, and it has been considered a blunder for decades, it is in fact a word, and its use is widespread.



Falcon Capt said:
The proper word for what you are trying to say is "regardless"...
Well, on that point, you might be correct. However, as the debate has raged on for so long now, it's really hard to settle it once and for all with such a simple, albeit beautiful, proclamation.

:)


I'm still wondering, though. Was this one of the multitude of little things that annoy you, or is this the one that annoys you most?


:D






.
 

Rez O. Lewshun

Save the Profession
Joined
Jan 19, 2004
Posts
13,422
Total Time
X>X
chperplt said:
Rez,

No need to be sorry.... Like I said before, it's going to be a great month of baseball. If you look at the last 3 series with the Rays, I believe the Yanks have won game 1 each time and then nada... Let's hope they lose the next 3 (I think)...

I really hope it comes down to the final weekend in Boston. Irregardless of who wins, it would be great ball.

Agreed! But let me give you the NYY view. This season has been "on the edge of the seat" for us. Even with our payroll, talent buying and IMM to Katrina victems by the way, you think we would've had better results. I mean George has been jumping up and down like a horny gorilla in a cage....

So, with that said, when the Yanks win, that is good...and when BOSOX lose..that is......WOW!
 

Rez O. Lewshun

Save the Profession
Joined
Jan 19, 2004
Posts
13,422
Total Time
X>X
chperplt said:
Rez,

If you look at the last 3 series with the Rays, I believe the Yanks have won game 1 each time and then nada... Let's hope they lose the next 3 (I think)...

Not tonight....:D
 
Top