Text 29656, 152 rader
Skriven 2006-05-15 15:51:50 av Roy Witt (1:1/22)
  Kommentar till text 29513 av Philip Lozier (1:267/169)
Ärende: Canadian "Skills"
=========================
14 May 06 01:28, Philip Lozier wrote to Roy Witt:


 RW>>>> You don't know shit from shinola...

 PL>>> Oh jes I do-oooooo. And not when they're a pile on the floor
 PL>>> either. Yet I do not -really- know what "shinola" is (although of
 PL>>> course I heard the term before) nor am I sure I -want- to know.
 PL>>> Couldn't care less really.

 RW>> LOL! Shit and Shinola have something in common, they both could be
 RW>> black,
 RW>> brown and sometimes even white.

 PL> Sounds like people.

 RW>> I've never seen any green shinola,
 RW>> but
 RW>> I've seen green and yellow shit before.

 PL> AYE!!! My son was very good at that! <G> ... gotta remind him of that
 PL> some day when he's acting like his shit don't stink ... <G> He's 25
 PL> now, hasn't given me a grandson yet, and... well... anyway...

 RW>> Maybe there is green and/or
 RW>> yellow
 RW>> shinola, but I've never seen any.

 PL> I've seen green and yellow shit (not to mention other
 PL> combinations)... Shinola, for some reason, seems to scare the shit
 PL> out of me at this time :>

 RW>> The phrase comes from city boys who're addressing 'farmers'...

 RW>> When the farm boys came to town, they had shit on their shoes from
 RW>> all that walking in the cow and pig pens.

 PL> Okay...

 RW>> Sometimes it was black, sometimes with a green tint, but mostly,
 RW>> it was brown.

 PL> You're scaring me Roy! ;>  You seem to know a little bit more than I
 PL> ever wanted to know about shit ;>

Shit and Shinola are so senonymous with each other, they're described in
this article on Wikipedia.

"Shinola is a brand of wax shoe polish that was available in the early- to
mid-20th century. The original trademark was filed in 1929 by '2 IN
1-SHINOLA-BIXBY CORPORATION', New Jersey.

Its immortality in colloquial English comes from its use in the
alliterative phrase [He] doesn't know shit from Shinola.

Implied is that shit and Shinola, while superficially similar, are quite
different in effect when applied to shoes or carelessly stepped in. One
who fails to distinguish one from the other is therefore ill-informed or
ignorant.

The phrase first became widely popular during World War II. The 1979 Carl
Reiner film The Jerk includes a memorable demonstration of the phrase.

Similar meaning can be found in the expression, doesn't know his ass from
his elbow, or the variant, doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground.

 RW>> Shinola of course, is the name of the manufacturer who makes shoe
 RW>> polish.

 PL> OK.  Now it starts to make sense... but Shinola is no longer
 PL> produced, right?  Hence why people of my age or younger would have no
 PL> idea what it was.

Yeah, but we can't use the replacement shoe polish in the same way. "He
doesn't know shit from Kiwi", would go over like a lead baloon with the
NZers. Besides, it wouldn't sound as good either.

 PL>>> We're not talking wood and band piles, but intact barrels...
 PL>>> meaning the structure intact, despite the condition of the
 PL>>> materials... can, or cannot, an empty barrel rattle. SHUT UP! But
 PL>>> answer the question.

 RW>> No, empty barrels do not rattle.

 PL> Some do... some don't.

None do.

 PL> There are factors involved with the particular barrels. SOME empty
 PL> barrels most certainly DO rattle. Stop saying "NO", and figure it
 PL> out.

There's no reason to stop saying no, empty barrels do not rattle.

 RW>> I've been trying to educate you since this all began. There is
 RW>> nothing in an empty barrel, therefore there is nothing that will
 RW>> make the barrel rattle.

 PL> But you are reasoning from the POV that the rattling comes from the
 PL> area which was meant to contain something within.

Or it's walls that would contain something within, which is the only thing
besides the bottom that makes a barrel.

 PL> Maybe, the empty barrel that rattles, is rattling from the barrel
 PL> itself. NOT what may or may not be contained within it.

Empty barrels do not rattle.

 PL> It's too fucking simple!  You should have had this ages ago.  You're
 PL> no fucking dummy from my POV, but you damn sure are "tunnel visioned"
 PL> and closed minded.

No one has come along to convince me otherwise. Besides, empty barrels do
not rattle.

 PL> *THAT* pisses me off!  It really does!  It really does because I KNOW
 PL> you know better.

Yes, I do. Empty barrels do not rattle.

 PL>>> I wasn't "given" the asnwer (this isn't Jeapordy ya know), but
 PL>>> thought about it, formulated an oppinion, and solicited outside the
 PL>>> echo if I was "on the right track" via (oh that wonderful thing
 PL>>> again) netmail... a puzzle to me, and I wanted to solve it.

 RW>> LOL! Logic failed you then.

 PL> Nope.  But logic seems to escape you.  In your case, something you
 PL> never had can fail you.

In that case, I'd not be harmed by it.

 PL> Bye... I don't even feel like going down through the rest of this
 PL> message.

So, you're runnin' out...when beaten in a debate, you run out and that's
your problem.

 PL> Blah, blah, blah... and yadda, yadda, yadda.

 PL> You never get to a definitive point.  EVER.

I'm waiting for the day when you can come to any definitive point in one
line of text...here we are and all you've done thus far is to tell me what
I know isn't true, but you have never made a point of proof for your
position.


Roy
--- Twit(t) Filter v2.1 (C) 2000
 * Origin: Hacienda de Rio de Guadalupe * South * Texas, USA * (1:1/22)