/vp/ seems slow lately. Lets have an Azumarill thread.

>>31869703
not slow

its just getting ddosed by the hacker called 4chan or something

i literally couldnt post for 2 hours

>>31869703
>Lets
/vp/ is illiterate. Completely and terribly illiterate. I don't mean spelling something incorrectly here or there, or not knowing a quadrisyllabic word. I mean that this board, centered around a game that touts itself as helping young children read, cannot even spell the names of the majority of the monsters that are its subject. People will spell names of Pokémon and characters incorrectly on a regular basis, and be unable to comprehend even slightly more advanced sentence structures. This board is filled with people whose intelligence, when measured on a metric of the ability to read and comprehend written language, would be far below the average in any first world country, and arguably 4chan as a whole. Why is this? Is the absurd nature of the Pokémon series affecting your ability to read? Perhaps because Pokémon attracts autists (colloquial jargon so adequate in this situation,) we have people who spend more time memorizing charts than how to properly read them. However, people with autism actually typically score higher on IQ tests and reading comprehension tests, so it doesn't make much sense to label that as the reason. I'm completely astounded by the collective lack of knowledge that this board displays.

File: 37581383_p0.jpg (359KB, 500x700px) Image search: [Google]

359KB, 500x700px

I have some Azumarill.

>>31869779
>can't even read his own copypasta

>>31869779
>situation,)
/vp/ is illiterate. Completely and terribly illiterate. I don't mean spelling something incorrectly here or there, or not knowing a quadrisyllabic word. I mean that this board, centered around a game that touts itself as helping young children read, cannot even spell the names of the majority of the monsters that are its subject. People will spell names of Pokémon and characters incorrectly on a regular basis, and be unable to comprehend even slightly more advanced sentence structures. This board is filled with people whose intelligence, when measured on a metric of the ability to read and comprehend written language, would be far below the average in any first world country, and arguably 4chan as a whole. Why is this? Is the absurd nature of the Pokémon series affecting your ability to read? Perhaps because Pokémon attracts autists; we have people who spend more time memorizing charts than how to properly read them. However, people with autism actually typically score higher on IQ tests and reading comprehension tests, so it doesn't make much sense to label that as the reason. I'm completely astounded by the collective lack of knowledge that this board displays.

>>31869779
not to mention
>we have people who spend more time memorizing charts than how to properly read them
>than how to properly read them
kek

>>31869798
Having the comma inside of parentheses is correct.

>>31869807
Explain the error here.

>>Having the comma inside of parentheses is correct.
nope

>>Explain the error here.
>>we have people who spend more time memorizing charts than how to properly read them
did you read the sentence? you're asking me to explain the error when the entire sentence is the error. it's nonsensical grammatically

>>31869937
sorry i forgot how to 4chin, its 7am i haven't slept

mind my autistic greentext method

>>31869937
>>31869944
You're wrong.

File: 36407598_p0.png (360KB, 768x1280px) Image search: [Google]

360KB, 768x1280px

>>31869937
I dunno man, it makes sense to me. But I'm no English major.

Either way, this should be an Azumarill thread.

>>31869976
Thanks for the support. I will leave the thread now.

>>31869976
>>31869965
No, are you guys reading the sentence? It says more time, not more people. The sentence would make sense if it said, "we have more people who spend time memorizing charts than people who know how to properly read them."

And no, it's not wrong. It makes no sense to end the inside of a parenthesis in a comma.

>>31870008
Bait.

File: 46158490_p0.png (632KB, 1660x1973px) Image search: [Google]

632KB, 1660x1973px

>>31870008
The sentence as it is is saying that there are some people on this board, any at all, who spend more time memorizing charts than they spend time learning how to actually comprehend the charts.

'Least that's what I picked up.

>>31870008
The way that sentence is phrased you're comparing the time people spend reading charts, to what? The time people bother learning how to properly read them? Are you trying to compare amounts of people?

>>31870043
But that's not what it says. It makes no mention of "learning" how to properly read them.

File: 45430398_p0.jpg (1MB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1024x1024px

>>31870058
It's inferred from context.

>>31870021
I've read literally hundreds of works of classic fiction and not once has the inside of a parenthesis ever ended in a comma. Nowhere is that a thing. Nowhere on Google; nowhere, anywhere, ever. What purpose does it even serve? Is this all one large multi-poster bait that I'm trapped in?

>>31869703
>Sun & Moon turn out to be overhyped, shitty garbage
>surprised that /vp/ is slow "lately"

>>31870075
It says nothing about learning. You don't "infer" a random verb from the context. I could've guessed what it was trying to say, because it could've been one of two likely things (either comparing people or time spent) but that's not the point. the point is that that entire bait copypasta about spelling is ironically grammatically incorrect

>>31870084
not if you're stupid.

>>31870130
nice

we going to show examples of the inside of a parenthesis ending in a comma? you got someone working diligently to find one?
what about inferring a verb?

File: 41956455_p0.png (16KB, 535x679px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 535x679px

>>31870122
Anon, by replying to it in the first place you only give whoever wrote it what they want.

I still don't see how you can't understand what the sentence is getting at, though yeah, I certainly haven't seen a comma put at the end of parenthesis before.

>>31870180
not if the person that pasted it was the same person trying to correct me

unless you're suggesting the correction was also bait which i don't personally buy