Another Trailer up in smoke

so I hear Carries moms trailer burned down and their was not electrict out their they are saying it was an accient just like Carries trailer and store

So what are you trying to say?

Happy Dad wrote:

So what are you trying to say?

I am not saying anything I just think it is kind of suspicious that the trailer had nothing in it and it was just moved and they are saying that someone vandalize it they are saying that the farmers had stuff stolen out their but never anything burned down if you knew this family you would understand

Sally wrote:

<quoted text>I am not saying anything I just think it is kind of suspicious that the trailer had nothing in it and it was just moved and they are saying that someone vandalize it they are saying that the farmers had stuff stolen out their but never anything burned down if you knew this family you would understand

ok... You're right, I don't know them. I'm guessing by what you're NOT saying, this family may not be above burning their trailer for insurance. And It also seems like, even though you're not exactly saying it, it seems like this family already has a bad reputation. Would you say that's a fair way to present what you're NOT trying to say?

Happy Dad wrote:

<quoted text>ok... You're right, I don't know them. I'm guessing by what you're NOT saying, this family may not be above burning their trailer for insurance. And It also seems like, even though you're not exactly saying it, it seems like this family already has a bad reputation. Would you say that's a fair way to present what you're NOT trying to say?

Yes :)

they should get a real job and stop scamming .rates are going up for my insurance.

Happy Dad wrote:

<quoted text>ok... You're right, I don't know them. I'm guessing by what you're NOT saying, this family may not be above burning their trailer for insurance. And It also seems like, even though you're not exactly saying it, it seems like this family already has a bad reputation. Would you say that's a fair way to present what you're NOT trying to say?

good observation happy dad! I am curious, Sally, what would you like to see happen to 'said' family?

secret id wrote:

<quoted text>
good observation happy dad! I am curious, Sally, what would you like to see happen to 'said' family?

I confess it may have been a teeny bit facetious. But Sally was so sweet I just let it go. Lol.

Happy Dad wrote:

<quoted text>I confess it may have been a teeny bit facetious. But Sally was so sweet I just let it go. Lol.

I am getting good at reading people on here!! I also assumed that :-) She does seem sweet. I am still curious about what people like to see accomplished when posting about others. I know, dumb question, but I always have faith that there is some non-malicious reasoning.

In this case anyway I'm guessing that it's Sally just venting.

Happy Dad wrote:

In this case anyway I'm guessing that it's Sally just venting.

actually, it's pretty refreshing for topix.

Sally wrote:

so I hear Carries moms trailer burned down and their was not electrict out their they are saying it was an accient just like Carries trailer and store

OK Sally, let's try to remember that "their" cannot be used any which way you feel like it. It has a proper place. Generally, "their" belongs in statements or sentences that involve possession. "There" is different. "They're" is also different. Try learning this concept to ensure you are a worthy role model to the little kiddies reading on Topix.

"i cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg. The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it dseno't mtaetr in waht oerdr the ltteres in a wrod are, the olny iproamtnt tihng is taht the frsit and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it whotuit a pboerlm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Azanmig huh? yaeh and I awlyas tghuhot slpeling was ipmorantt!"

Well-Illiterate Police I think your just posting to post, so sally didn't properly use the right spellings we can still understand what she's saying. That's just plain rude all you had to do is reply using their or They're in a sentence most people catch their mistakes!

OMG wrote:

"i cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg. The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it dseno't mtaetr in waht oerdr the ltteres in a wrod are, the olny iproamtnt tihng is taht the frsit and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it whotuit a pboerlm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Azanmig huh? yaeh and I awlyas tghuhot slpeling was ipmorantt!"

Well-Illiterate Police I think your just posting to post, so sally didn't properly use the right spellings we can still understand what she's saying. That's just plain rude all you had to do is reply using their or They're in a sentence most people catch their mistakes!

"Your" is definitely not the same as "you're". Sorry, please play again!

Illiterate Police wrote:

<quoted text>
"Your" is definitely not the same as "you're". Sorry, please play again!

Don't feed the Trolls.