On Nov 17, 6:27*pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"jps" wrote in message

...



On Tue, 17 Nov 2009 17:15:31 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Tue, 17 Nov 2009 17:01:07 -0600, wrote:

BTW, Em, I was speaking of obsequiosness, not an informal bow.

Guess he's not god like - when he's obsequious anyway.
Pretty much like he's a shrimp when he's not a big oaf.
And he's senile when he's not juvenile.
I think I get it.

--Vic

Big words are always better if they make the writer sound smart.
Unless they serve to garble the writer's meaning, cloud the *intended
message and confuse or mislead the reader.

Hope you're all feeling supercalifragalisticexpealidocious.

Only if the biguns are spelled correctly.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Honestly, do you really wish to use the word "Biguns," instead of
"Bigguns?"

There is a huge difference.

"TopBassDog" wrote in message
...
On Nov 17, 6:27 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"jps" wrote in message

...



On Tue, 17 Nov 2009 17:15:31 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Tue, 17 Nov 2009 17:01:07 -0600, wrote:

BTW, Em, I was speaking of obsequiosness, not an informal bow.

Guess he's not god like - when he's obsequious anyway.
Pretty much like he's a shrimp when he's not a big oaf.
And he's senile when he's not juvenile.
I think I get it.

--Vic

Big words are always better if they make the writer sound smart.
Unless they serve to garble the writer's meaning, cloud the intended
message and confuse or mislead the reader.

Hope you're all feeling supercalifragalisticexpealidocious.

Only if the biguns are spelled correctly.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Honestly, do you really wish to use the word "Biguns," instead of
"Bigguns?"

There is a huge difference.


Bygones will be bygones...
--
Nom=de=Plume