Swan (Cums Alone) is one of the Gash Hares for today’s Hash trail. It was her first time as a Hare, and I joined the group for their trail-scouting expedition yesterday. I was the only man to go. The weather is “supposed” to be dry today (there’s a light rain while I’m writing this), and so the gals decided to add some off-pavement time to their original plan. That’s basically doing most of the My Bitch trail before descending back down to Marian Hills. Then there will be a walk through the streets of San Isidro, back up into Alta Vista, then down Baloy Road to our On-Home at Kim’s Place. The trail came out to around 6.5K, and I deem it moderately easy, even by my low standards. I’ll be joining the gals for the trail marking this morning. This afternoon, I’ll be manning the beer stop at a Hasher’s new store in San Isidro. Let’s hope everything goes according to plan!
Our Sunday evening on-the-town started with ordering birria tacos from Myleen’s for delivery to Red Bar. After dinner and some beers, it was off to Jumpin’ Jacks for our nightcap.
Then it was time to call it a day, and we headed for home.
From the September 2019 LTG archives, I shared the story of my lifelong aversion to proper grammar, especially punctuation. Kevin Kim did his best to educate me, but after six years of trying and seeing little to no progress from me, he has finally given up on teaching this old dog new tricks.
Today’s YouTube video talks about a category where Filipinas are ranked at the top in the world. That would be women watching porn channels. Bless their hearts.
Humor time:
Okay, I’m back from the adventure with the Gash Hares this morning, marking the trail. I brought up the rear with the idea that I’d fill in any gaps that they may have missed marking. I often said it is better to overmark a trail than undermark it, but they laid it on so thick, and often today I began to wonder about that. Anyway, no one has any excuse to get lost out there. I’ll man the beer stop since I’ve already done the trail today.
Re: Hash trail
Hopefully all went well, and the rain held off.
Re: grammar
While I do try to avoid any egregious mistakes, I am not too hung up on the more subtle errors. As long as the average person understands what is being said/written, I am okay with it.
Grammar is always changing. What we think is “correct” now will probably not be 100 years from now (or a couple of hundred years in the past).
>From the September 2019 LTG archives, I shared the story of my lifelong aversion to proper grammar, especially punctuation. Kevin Kim did his best to educate me, but after six years of trying and seeing little to no progress from me, he has finally given up on teaching this old dog new tricks.
I asked for the above to be written in 1750 style, not so much focussing on the words, but more on the grammar and give notes on what had changed.
>From the Archives of LTG, for September, 2019, I did relate the History of my long and obstinate Aversion to Grammar rightly so called, and, more especially, to that Part of it which concerneth Points and Stops. Mr. Kevin Kim had, for many Years, employed his best Endeavours to instruct me therein; yet, after six Years spent in that charitable Labour, and after having observed in me little, or no Amendment, he hath at length desisted from the Attempt, judging, as I suppose, that an old Dog is not easily taught new Tricks.
A few grammar/style differences reflected here:
In 1750, writers often used longer, more formally balanced sentences, with more subordinate clauses. Capitalization was also less standardized, and important nouns were often capitalized: Archives, History, Aversion, Grammar, Points and Stops.
The wording also uses forms that were still common in formal prose, such as “hath” instead of “has,” “concerneth” instead of “concerns,” and “therein” instead of “in it.”
The phrase “little, or no Amendment” also reflects older punctuation habits, where commas were often used more rhetorically, to mark pauses, rather than according to modern rules.
Also changed “I shared the story” to “I did relate the History” because 18th-century prose often favored a more formal auxiliary construction, especially in polished written English.
No idea if the above is actually correct, but seems to make sense. Maybe @Kevin Kim will chime in on the accuracy of the rewrite.