On 7/10/2012 10:43 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says...

On 7/10/2012 10:32 AM, Meyer wrote:
On 7/10/2012 10:11 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 7/10/12 10:05 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , dump-on-
says...

On 7/10/12 9:01 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , dump-on-
says...

On 7/10/12 8:19 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 7/10/12 8:02 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article 1870c41e-f4c1-4b16-a5e1-
,

says...

Man, wish I had some money in this local company...
http://thechronicleherald.ca/busines...rtup-goinstant



What's a "young-uns" spelling guru?



Posters whose writing skills suck shouldn't be pointing out what
they
believe to be the writing errors of others, Mr. Comma Fault.

Oh. "Young-uns" happens to be in several dictionaries.

Cite? And yes, I wholeheartedly agree that Don shouldn't be
pointing out
what they believe to be the writing errors of others, Mr. Fat Ass.



Cite? Google it, moron.

Yeah, that's a typical Scotty answer.



You can't even "google" a word?

young-uns isn't a word.


It appears in several of the popular dictionaries you can check on line.
It is by definition a word.

What kind of dictionarys are you looking at.
I couldn't find it in Websters or Oxford.


It's a loogieism... They make something up, then go and develop the
evidence to support it

You are too stupid to even follow a post. Harry is the one who said it
was a word and no one else.


Doesn't make it any less of a "loogieism", loogie...