Improper use of the word 'had' in articles

[susikala]

Dear Phoronix [...]

I fail to see a problem with the aforementioned uses of 'had'. It might not fit your personal taste, but grammatically it is alright -- one doesn't _have_ to use the Past Simple in the cases you mentioned, it's only more frequent.

[kraftman]

One of the most idiotic threads I've ever read.

[NeoBrain]

One of the most idiotic threads I've ever read.

Honestly, it would be only half as much idiotic if posts like this and like the first 2 or 3 responses just wouldn't occur.
It was a good meant advice to improve the quality of phoronix articles and even if the thread starter was a bit overambitious, responses like that are just childish.

No offense here so don't start flaiming now, please, but just think about what you're writing.

[kraftman]

Honestly, it would be only half as much idiotic if posts like this and like the first 2 or 3 responses just wouldn't occur.
It was a good meant advice to improve the quality of phoronix articles and even if the thread starter was a bit overambitious, responses like that are just childish.

No offense here so don't start flaiming now, please, but just think about what you're writing.

It was just idiotic attempt to "hey, look how I am smart!". This thread is childish if you didn't notice. Better focus on technical issues than on grammar and similar things. Maybe my intention was to make this idiotic thread even more idiotic?

No offense here so don't start flaiming now, please, but just think about what you're writing.

[mattst88]

It was just idiotic attempt to "hey, look how I am smart!". This thread is childish if you didn't noticed.

No. Not the intention. Guess again.

Believe it or not, the intention was to improve the quality of the articles.

Better focus on technical issues than on grammar and similar things.

See, here's what I don't understand. What you said is a fair argument.

Unfortunately, when making this argument you and others do it in such a way that destroys the thread. (Maybe try not being a jerk?)

Maybe my intention was to make this idiotic thread even more idiotic?

You've succeeded! Congratulations!

[kraftman]

No. Not the intention. Guess again.

Believe it or not, the intention was to improve the quality of the articles.

I believe in what I said before.

See, here's what I don't understand. What you said is a fair argument.

Unfortunately, when making this argument you and others do it in such a way that destroys the thread. (Maybe try not being a jerk?)

I think this thread is stupid so I'm answering in such a way. (Hey, but you are!)

You've succeeded! Congratulations!

It's mainly your merit.

[mattst88]

Hehe

I'm starting to like you.

[kraftman]

Hehe

I'm starting to like you.

Yeah, I keep your thread alive