There is, or was, tho.
There is, or was, tho.
This is a fuse box, with a flathead you should be able to open it and/or pull a small tray with the fuse itself inside. You Brits do your electrical wiring with ring-shaped circuits and put a fuse in every outlet.
This kind of outlet is intended for things you don’t unplug and a socket doesn’t make sense, usually boilers, ovens, stoves, ACs, alarm systems as already commented…
Or the pg tips approach: ‘d’ya know what? No more tag or thread for ya now you’ve got to fish and pinch the baggy out of your scolding tea ya wanker’.
And that the things they eat are the result of natural selection only.
Yeah maybe not even non-standard as much as non-formal in this case.
I wanted to mean ‘different from what you learn in English class in school as a kid’ so non-formal, non -standard, dialectal, slang, misspellings, same-sounding words…
More or less my point, languages are weird with lots of arbitrary idiomatic things—‘would rather’ but ‘had better’.
After posting the comment I’ve thought ‘wait, it makes more sense for it to be should’ so my guesses are a bit off today.
That’d be a contraction of ‘would’ in this case, wouldn’t it? As an ESL speaker I used to find these grammar ‘mistakes’ (for lack of a better word) made more difficult for me to parse the sentences. As with code ‘written once but read many times’ would apply here.
But isn’t that example absolute ‘misandry rage bait’ tho? I had to look it up (because I haven’t been so terminally online lately) and, after skimming through some discovery channel results, it seems like exactly that.
Those videos just cherry pick the answers that are gonna give them more ‘engagement’, I do believe that ‘I prefer to encounter a random bear rather than a random man while alone in the forest’ to be a rather ‘misandrist’ (just plainly dumb honestly) answer, and I don’t believe this is what a majority of women think. So I see it as obvious bait to drive those that like to cry misandry when they are forced to try women as equals to the comments.
Quick edit: if the question would have been ‘who have hurt you less?’ Or ‘by whom are you less threatened on a daily basis?’ then ‘bears’ is definitely a reasonable answer.
‘He’s out of line but he’s right’. I mean, is a bit ironic to give this level of permission to a program that is too malware-like to protect yourself from exactly that. We’re talking about hospitals, airports and airlines, government agencies… many critical systems, so much information’s security rely on a (foreign for most of the world) private company.
This is very correct, you can see tall baseball is not completely feared by fish nor women for to reach true fear from either one must reach an absolutely neutral state with the others.
Others had pointed the reasons, I wanted to add that you have to stop at the line, and if something obstructs your sight (at stop signs, not traffic lights) you have to go a bit forward and stop again.
Right? It’s just a shiny conductive plastic.