It’s not that one’s better than the other, it’s just that the idiom was originally one way (“couldn’t”), and then everyone kept saying it wrong until it sounded right, just like with “literally.” Logically, you’re argument is unsound and historically incorrect, but trying to argue against the evolution of language is futile and ultimately regressive. So you say it however you want, old idioms are lame anyway.
They’re literally stranded in space with no way home, sounds like they need rescuing to me.
Stick, great for getting stuff out of holes
My grandma called them davenports, now that’s a classy-sounding furniture fuck.
Currently, Roll for Sandwich/Adventures in Aardia and No More Jockeys. Also love me some J. Kenji López-Alt, with a bit of Henry’s Kitchen for contrast.
That’s subjective. It’s good for me!
That I don’t have precognition? Ok good, glad I could help you make that point! In the future, you can just assume everyone you meet lacks precognition, because it’s not real. I know that sounds almost like it’s own form of precognition, but it’s not, it’s just good reasoning.
Yes, because to refer to it in any other way would have required precognition, which I unfortunately lack. My bad?
Your original post tells us to pronounce it the way she says it, but doesn’t actually show us how she says it.
Because I’m not her. You figured it out and found a video on your own, you clearly didn’t need me. Why would I know better than her how to pronounce it?
How did you expect us to pronounce it correctly if we haven’t heard her say it?
I didn’t. I presumed that if someone cared enough, they would find an appropriate video; that presumption was proven correct. But I never expected anyone to do anything, certainly not to get so incredibly butt-hurt by mild sarcasm.
I never said I did.
If the video specifically made to teach you how to pronounce her name didn’t help, what makes you think I can?
Where does that right come from? Being on the land that they brutally colonized? Maybe if they hadn’t spent the last few decades trying to eradicate an entire population, no one would be accusing them of genocide. As it stands, the accusations are historically accurate.
He knowingly signed bombs, doesn’t really matter to me who’s children it killed, he’s a psychopath.
How could selling something you naturally produce be a scam? I can see how easily you could get ripped off on the price, but in the end you’re still making money and automatically replacing the plasma lost. Even if they’re not actually using the plasma for their stated purpose, I’d still argue the donator is not the one getting scammed. I guess it really comes down to your definition of “scam”.