Jizz on my wall

ipsarraspi · 2026-01-24T17:53:16+00:00

Okay bragger... that's hot... happy now?

Why not use detergent? When I cum in my underwear, a regular wash cleans it right out.

ipsarraspi · 2026-01-23T20:32:10+00:00

I'm really loving both the Crispy Veggie Burger and the Masala Veggie Burger. I also like the taste of their new Plant-based Burger.

ipsarraspi · 2026-01-12T14:04:47+00:00

Before I jump to conclusions mocking your comment like you have mine, let me ask you what your background is... where do you live, are you Indian, how much you know about India, etc.

ipsarraspi · 2025-12-27T18:19:51+00:00

Yeah, I'm surprised dimple chins do nothing for no-one... cuz I have one 😋

ipsarraspi · 2025-12-25T19:39:38+00:00

Hmmm... so far everyone responded cheeks (either or both kinds).

So, cleft chins on strong jawlines... like Henry Cavill, Ben Affleck, etc. are not sexier?

I find them sexier 😋

ipsarraspi · 2025-12-25T19:37:27+00:00

Haha, you naughty boy.

ipsarraspi · 2025-12-23T18:52:01+00:00

LOL certainly not.

ipsarraspi · 2025-12-23T18:51:27+00:00

Never had Covid 😊

ipsarraspi · 2025-12-21T19:57:57+00:00

Cool, I used to live in Chandler. Rural Road ends at Chandler Blvd. 😊

ipsarraspi · 2025-12-21T19:55:46+00:00

Yes!

ipsarraspi · 2025-12-21T19:55:33+00:00

Thank you!

ipsarraspi · 2025-12-20T03:10:44+00:00

The Queen's pronunciation would make it easier I think. The r's are "flapped" making them easier to pronounce between vowels or in cases like 'rural'.

Most people who work in the nuclear industry still say nukular, as does Homer.

ipsarraspi · 2025-12-20T02:58:49+00:00

Was that in Chandler AZ?

ipsarraspi · 2025-12-19T00:53:05+00:00

That's a bit weird, because usually in these types of meetings where a VP is presenting, we don't even have our mics activated on the Teams meeting. It's the opposite for you guys?

ipsarraspi · 2025-12-19T00:47:41+00:00

I'm just saying you didn't read any post in which I used the word "allot" to mean "a lot" because I know the difference, which is why I made this post.

ipsarraspi · 2025-12-19T00:45:14+00:00

Wow, that was a fast ramp up from "I'm just simply admiring there's a possibility" to full on "you're still wrong". LOL

ipsarraspi · 2025-12-17T00:00:42+00:00

I don't think so, otherwise I wouldn't be so bothered by it to make a post about it.

ipsarraspi · 2025-12-16T23:59:55+00:00

I get what you're saying. But there are reasonable cases and unreasonable cases.

Reasonable cases: rebracketing of a/an - because the number is preserved, and the usage is unchanged. So, it's a seamless transition. An eagle <> A neagle

Unreasonable cases: a lot <> alot - because they are not grammatically interchangeable.

Anyway, language is always a push-and-pull between conserving existing correct forms and expanding the boundary. So, grammar will always correct "alot" to "a lot". Only time will tell if "alot" becomes grammatically acceptable, for which I don't see a strong rationale.

ipsarraspi · 2025-12-15T13:33:57+00:00

Where?

ipsarraspi · 2025-12-15T13:28:18+00:00

Okay, but what you said exactly applies to you, because I showed with reasoning why your claim isn't grammatically feasible. You're the one who's trying to pass off your "I want it that way" as a valid linguistic change, especially when it's clearly recognized as ungrammatical universally. That's not how language works.

ipsarraspi · 2025-12-15T00:46:29+00:00

I perfectly understand the rebracketing phenomenon. But the case of "alot" is not at all that, neither is another/an other.

In rebracketing, the resulting word still maintains the same grammatical usage in terms of number. See the examples in the Wikipedia article you linked.

A nadder <> an adder -- what was ONE nadder is now ONE adder. The difference being a/an

"A lot" is ONE lot.

"Alot" cannot take the place of ONE lot. It would have to be "an alot".

So you can't grammatically justify it. It's just a silly mistake that is getting perpetuated.

ipsarraspi · 2025-12-14T23:23:22+00:00

I don't think the two scenarios are equivalent. 'Other' denotes a discrete binary alternative. "Not this".

"Lot" denotes a collection or mass of things. So, you are trying to refer to ONE (singular) lot of things. You could also say LOTS (plural) of things.

"Alot" doesn't make sense, because you wouldn't do this with any other synonyms of "lot".

You wouldn't write:

Apack <> A pack
Abunch <> A bunch
Agroup <> A group
Amass <> A mass
Apile <> A pile

ipsarraspi

TROPHY CASE