 Poster: A snowHead
|
| Gored wrote: |
| rungsp wrote: |
He said...she said
I wonder which one will "win" (obviously the lawyers!) |
whoever can prove they was further down the hill |
It is not "they was" it is "they were". Just saying.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
"I have the low ground! It's OVER!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
Wiz ^
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| zikomo wrote: |
| Gored wrote: |
| rungsp wrote: |
He said...she said
I wonder which one will "win" (obviously the lawyers!) |
whoever can prove they was further down the hill |
It is not "they was" it is "they were". Just saying. |
Gwynneth refers to itself as 'they' so the grammar is more complicated than you think 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
@red 27, 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Gored, It's not its, it's it's  !
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Isn't "it" is the obvious non-binary pronoun, because it's singular? "They" is just confusing - just think in what a tangle people will get with "they're" and "their"?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| Quote: |
just think in what a tangle people will get with "they're" and "their"
|
Seeing Gwynnie is involved would that entanglement be an unconscious coupling?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Richard_Sideways wrote: |
Seeing Gwynnie is involved would that entanglement be an unconscious coupling? |
Yesterday...
| rumdiary wrote: |
| Is the victim claiming for damages for pain and suffering following an unconscious coupling? |
Keep up! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| pam w wrote: |
| Isn't "it" is the obvious non-binary pronoun, because it's singular? "They" is just confusing - just think in what a tangle people will get with "they're" and "their"? |
Nah "they" is more humanising.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
I don't find it so. I find it just sounds like referring to nobody in particular. As "they say that Boris Johnson has always had mistresses".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@adithorp, bah
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Why-oh-why has the internet not provided go-pro footage galore of the unfortunate, and disputed, coming together?
I thought that was what Twitter was for?
We - the  jury - need to give definitive verdict
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| pam w wrote: |
| Isn't "it" is the obvious non-binary pronoun, because it's singular? "They" is just confusing - just think in what a tangle people will get with "they're" and "their"? |
Agreed. "It" would the logical singular choice to avoid any confusion about plurals!, 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| adithorp wrote: |
Seems he had go-pro footage and sent it to family but its all been lost  |
Dropped off the side of a ferry into the North Sea?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
-
I would like to sue the three snowboarders who caused me to break my greater tuberosity (part of the shoulder joint) 30 or so years ago. First day on the piste (!), just above Meribel, warming up for the week to come, leisurely skiing down, I noticed 3 snowboarders on my left in a line. They were looking at me strangely and heading to a convergence maybe 30 or 40 metres ahead, but plenty of time to change course. Hmm-m, I thought, as they took my attention, causing me to fail to see the ramp they had built in the middle of the piste. Flying through the air in half of a perfect jump as I hit the ramp, I realised why they had been watching me. The second half of the jump was not as perfect as the first and I hit the ground, sprawling forward with quite an impact. The doctor told me afterwards that my arm must have been flung upwards pulling my greater tuberosity apart. When I managed to get up, would you believe it, the snowboarders were nowhere to be seen.
Snowboarders, eh? But where's one of those ambulance chasing lawyers when you need one. Open and shut case -- skier vs snowboarder. No contest, particularly in those dark days when most snowboarders used to sit in the middle of the piste just over the brow of a hillock, smoking a gauloises. The judge would have had no alternative than to award me "loads of money".
Anyway, all in the past now and I am completely healed. And to show I am not trolling, some of my best friends are snowboarders!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Watched some of Paltrow testimony last night, a quite bizarre explanation (regardless of fault in this case).
She said "two skis came between my skis, forcing my legs apart and there was a body pressing against me. There was a strange grunting noise and my brain was trying to make sense of what was happening. I thought, is this a practical joke, is someone doing something perverted"
I suppose two points spring to mind from her testimony -
Firstly, this sounds like a bit of a low speed nothing bump.
Secondly, her reference to forcing legs apart, body pressing against her makes it all sound a bit "dodgy", perhaps looking to discredit the guy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
@Bergmeister, take the example, 'if a person wants to go skiing then they need to buy a lift pass' 'they' has always had the capacity to be about the singular non-defined gender, 'it' hasn't, if you swap out they for it in my sentence then it just sounds wrong
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| rambotion wrote: |
| @Bergmeister, take the example, 'if a person wants to go skiing then they need to buy a lift pass' 'they' has always had the capacity to be about the singular non-defined gender, 'it' hasn't, if you swap out they for it in my sentence then it just sounds wrong |
Yes - but "they" is gramatically incorrect and usage in that context goes back to Pam W's point of using plural terminology when referring to a singular person. I'd rather see, 'If individuals want to go skiing then they need to buy a lift pass."**
**(unless they are ski touring
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My problem with "they" is long seated prior to the current debates on gender or plurality. I have a colleague who constantly uses "they" in conversations about many different parties either in attempt to obfuscate or through lack of precision and I constantly have to get clarity on which "they" he is talking about. So all this other "theyness" just serves to wind me up more. For example if "they" are driving, who is responsible? [/pedantic mode]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| GreenDay wrote: |
Watched some of Paltrow testimony last night, a quite bizarre explanation (regardless of fault in this case).
She said "two skis came between my skis, forcing my legs apart and there was a body pressing against me. There was a strange grunting noise and my brain was trying to make sense of what was happening. I thought, is this a practical joke, is someone doing something perverted"
I suppose two points spring to mind from her testimony -
Firstly, this sounds like a bit of a low speed nothing bump.
Secondly, her reference to forcing legs apart, body pressing against her makes it all sound a bit "dodgy", perhaps looking to discredit the guy. |
Gives a new meaning to being "taken from behind".....!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
The " they" thing isn't that hard to get. We've all got minds plastic enough to tolerate different uses of the same word like "partner" to mean business/ life/ sexual and same/ other sex.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| albob wrote: |
| GreenDay wrote: |
Watched some of Paltrow testimony last night, a quite bizarre explanation (regardless of fault in this case).
She said "two skis came between my skis, forcing my legs apart and there was a body pressing against me. There was a strange grunting noise and my brain was trying to make sense of what was happening. I thought, is this a practical joke, is someone doing something perverted"
I suppose two points spring to mind from her testimony -
Firstly, this sounds like a bit of a low speed nothing bump.
Secondly, her reference to forcing legs apart, body pressing against her makes it all sound a bit "dodgy", perhaps looking to discredit the guy. |
Gives a new meaning to being "taken from behind".....!!! |
If they want an older skier to help with the reconstruction, just saying ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
@musher, just be careful of the jade egg......
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gwynneth saying that it was a potential sexual assault as the man was grunting - he had broken 3 ribs (allegedly) you daft bint, of course he was grunting.
I cracked two in ADH in Feb - the stack hurt, winded me, so in the aftermath I was grunting like the best "heavy breather" and the last thing even I would have wanted to do is position myself to take advantage of Gwynneths eco friendly base layer.
The case continues
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Yellow Snow wrote: |
| Gwynneth saying that it was a potential sexual assault as the man was grunting - he had broken 3 ribs (allegedly) you daft bint, of course he was grunting. ... |
Yes, but she could not have known that if he crashed into her from behind, which is the entire point of her evidence. Try to keep up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
@Yellow Snow, Actually, for the sake of accuracy , from the beeb site : "She later clarified that she was not accusing Mr Sanderson of sexual assault."
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
I've not been following this with the close attention it deserves. Who's accusing whom?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
@pam w, I think they are both accusing each other of causing the accident.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
@pam w, info in the OP
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
They're both accusing each other of the same thing: crashing into the other who was below them on the slope.
I'm not sure how one adjudicates something like that.
The male had a much larger case against her thrown out by a judge already, which doesn't help his case.
Presumably they did crash into each other. As people have already pointed out, any "damages" are likely to be less significant than the legal expenses of both parties.
I suppose Paltrow's legal position is defensive; I'm not sure what the male is hoping to achieve, or why.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Well, if you take the names out of the equation..
A 72 year old make skier claims that a 50 year old female skier hit him and skied off...
The 50 year old female skier claims the 72 year old male skier hit her...
I think his friend who was with him at the time asserts that she did indeed hit him. Is there some insinuation that there is some missing camera footage of his daughter??
Not sure who was with her at the time to corroborate her version of events.
I'd be inclined to think that the 50 year old was more in control than the 72 year old or could it just be one of those where both where pretty much at the same level on the slope and collided together?
Of course we don't know how proficient either skier is.
She was in the middle of a ski lesson with her children at the time. All seems a bit odd.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| eps wrote: |
| Not sure who was with her at the time to corroborate her version of event. |
The ski instructor
| eps wrote: |
| She was in the middle of a ski lesson with her children at the time. All seems a bit odd. |
I believe I saw something that her kids are going onto the stand this week
| brianatab wrote: |
| tbf, I'd not heard of these, but they do look similar to an item that is available in certain stores (or online) that are designed to cause certain sensations when walking. One could surmise that the movement of skiing may exacerbate the effect |
not going there on work computer but I can imagine!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marina Hyde has had her say about the proceedings and I'm not sure there's anything more that needs to be said. I'm mildly curious as to the outcome, but to me it's looking more and more like one of those cases that can only end in disappointment at the fact that it's not possible for both parties to lose.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| eps wrote: |
I'd be inclined to think that the 50 year old was more in control than the 72 year old. |
Really? Why??
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@jmr59, agreed that Marina Hyde has it nailed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
