Re: for writers
- From: Alan Hope <not.alan.hope@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 18:24:01 +0200
boots goes:
Alan Hope <not.alan.hope@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Jackson Pillock goes:
"Alan Hope" <not.alan.hope@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:lf5df29d55ftlss1v5bnfehohmhpo6lfqq@xxxxxxxxxx
: boots goes:
: >Here in the states there is a candy which amounts to a glob of
: >chocolate containing third-rate nuts, that is labelled a "truffle",
: >and relatively few people here in the states have any idea what pigs
: >have to do with truffles. Sometimes the facts are embarassing, but
: >one goes forward.
: I know what a truffle is, and what pigs root for. The word "candy"
: refers to boiled sugar, and is not appropriate to describe chocolate.
I've heard that dogs are often better truffle-finders than pigs.
I don't think dogs do it of their own accord, do they? Whereas pigs
certainly do.
I'm not getting your meaning clearly Hope. Are you implying that a
more skilled professional is less desireable than a less skilled
amateur because the amateur will "do it" of its own accord?
No, I'm talking about truffles.
--
AH
http://sour-grapes.blogsource.com
.
- References:
- for writers
- From: arnicapublishing
- Re: for writers
- From: Dr Zen
- Re: for writers
- From: Alan Hope
- Re: for writers
- From: boots
- Re: for writers
- From: Alan Hope
- Re: for writers
- From: Jackson Pillock
- Re: for writers
- From: Alan Hope
- Re: for writers
- From: boots
- for writers
- Prev by Date: Re: for writers
- Next by Date: Re: for writers
- Previous by thread: Re: for writers
- Next by thread: Re: for writers
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|