Track_Shovel to Lemmy [email protected]English • 4 days agoStand your groundslrpnk.netimagemessage-square45fedilinkarrow-up1917arrow-down17
arrow-up1910arrow-down1imageStand your groundslrpnk.netTrack_Shovel to Lemmy [email protected]English • 4 days agomessage-square45fedilink
minus-square@Typotyperlink11•3 days agoOr “Looters” Or “Lawyers” Or “Losers” Or maybe it really is “L’Otters”. Those radical left rascals causing mayhem and dissection in the workers.
minus-squareFaridlinkfedilink1•3 days agoYes, but we don’t know if that’s what they wanted to write. But in that case, maybe they also wanted to write “shoot” and not “shot”, so yeah, fair point.
minus-squareFaridlinkfedilink2•3 days agoThat’s what they tried to write, but to be lexically correct it should be “loiterers”.
Lotters? Is this some vernacular I’m unfamiliar with?
It says, in fact, LOπERS.
LOPIERS
WILL BE SH∞T ON SIGHT
They attempted to write “Loiters* will be shot* on sight”.
Or “Looters” Or “Lawyers” Or “Losers” Or maybe it really is “L’Otters”. Those radical left rascals causing mayhem and dissection in the workers.
Wouldn’t it be loiterers?
LotRers.
Fans of Lord of the Rings.
And wouldn’t it be shooted?
Yes, but we don’t know if that’s what they wanted to write. But in that case, maybe they also wanted to write “shoot” and not “shot”, so yeah, fair point.
What’s a loiter?
That’s what they tried to write, but to be lexically correct it should be “loiterers”.