quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
The use of close monitoring to ensure compliance implies a threat of force. That there is going to be any force is not something I hold. I've already stated that point, just not in those words.

monitoring means
to observe or record (the activity or performance) of (an engine or other device)
close monitoring is close recording of facts....weight loss, blood sugar levels, wieght, diet , calories, fluid intake, urine tests.... nothing to do with implied force.
REALLY you are going with that?
its really bloody ridiculous paranoia.
UNFOUNDED paranoia

OMFG!! Are you serious with that? The phrase "close monitoring" leaves open to interpretation just how close one will be monitored. We agree that it's not going to be even close to a 1984 situation.
Did you ever hover over a child to keep them from not doing their homework? Wouldn't that constitute "close monitoring" that "ensures" compliance?

Why would I stop my kids from doing their homework?

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
The use of close monitoring to ensure compliance implies a threat of force. That there is going to be any force is not something I hold. I've already stated that point, just not in those words.

Not in my English it doesn't.
There is NO such implication at all.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Yes, "compliance" wasn't in the quote. However, compliance would mean they are "eating better and exercising more." So, if you "ensure" they are "eating better and exercising more," you are ensuring compliance.

Nope.
I can "ensure" that my plants grow better. But if they don't??? Meh!! What do I do, chop them down or dig them up?
Jeeezz... You can be a real dunce sometimes Desi.
Merriam Webster
Main Entry: com£pli£ance
Pronunciation:k*m-*pl*-*n(t)s
Function:noun
Date:circa 1630
1 a : the act or process of complying to a desire, demand, proposal, or regimen or to coercion
b : conformity in fulfilling official requirements
2 : a disposition to yield to others
3 : the ability of an object to yield elastically when a force is applied : FLEXIBILITY
"We" (generally), are using definition 1a (the main part); with the doctors using 1b.
You, however, are taking ONLY the latter part of 1a and 2 and are refusing to even acknowledge the main part of 1a (and 1b).

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Reading is fundamental. The example I gave was your hovering to keep them from NOT doing their homework. That is, your hovering would keep them doing their homework.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Once again, I do not think the NHS or it's doctors are going to force anyone into doing anything.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
The verb "to ensure" has as it's object, "they are eating better and exercising more." That was the phrase. That is how it is parsed.

How am I wrong in that?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

It's his MO. Find one part of one section of a hair split and then spend pages defending it as if it were the entire sole absolute truth.

Just stop playing the game with him so he can tell himself he won and we'll all get on with life.

Including grateful people in the UK diagnosed earlier with pre-diabetes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

I have not seen the actual documents of implementation, however I have read the Telegraph article, and there were no direct quotes on this ensure or report or anything from Stevens.

Therefore, the hubris of the reporter in combining words does not make factual any implied or impugned Nazi-ism by the nutsuckers. We would have to go to the DailyMail for that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ExiledTyrant

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

It's his MO. Find one part of one section of a hair split and then spend pages defending it as if it were the entire sole absolute truth.

Just stop playing the game with him so he can tell himself he won and we'll all get on with life.

Including grateful people in the UK diagnosed earlier with pre-diabetes.

The end or the follicle? I mean, do you choose an end to split said hair, or does it split to a point then you split another... do you pluck the hair before splitting, or swing with the ax hoping to stop at the scalp, or do you just go ahead and cleave through the skull?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: ExiledTyrant

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

It's his MO. Find one part of one section of a hair split and then spend pages defending it as if it were the entire sole absolute truth.

Just stop playing the game with him so he can tell himself he won and we'll all get on with life.

Including grateful people in the UK diagnosed earlier with pre-diabetes.

The end or the follicle? I mean, do you choose an end to split said hair, or does it split to a point then you split another... do you pluck the hair before splitting, or swing with the ax hoping to stop at the scalp, or do you just go ahead and cleave through the skull?

This is the part where we bring in dictionary pastes of each word, simultaneously ignoring connotation for some words while inventing non-existent ones for others.

Oh, and to spend 113 posts repeating "I didn't say follicle, moron, I said hair" while emphasizing the semantic difference.

Also, since you mentioned cleaving the skull with an ax, the usual 2nd Amendment fetishists will be rushing in to spend another 113 posts proclaiming "See! Death by Ax! Are you going to ban firewood now????"

Makes me think that THESE guys are the sane ones, combining 1st and 2nd Amendment themes...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ubtt1RDk_M0

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Reading is fundamental. The example I gave was your hovering to keep them from NOT doing their homework. That is, your hovering would keep them doing their homework.

And what if they refuse to do it??
For most of us, we would just say 'fuckit' and let them get on with whatever they were doing.
By your definitions, there is going to be some physical violence or curtailment of liberty.
Or at least that is your assumption and posit - you said so.
Oh really??
You must live in a fucked up world Desi, to hold such violent views.

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Once again, I do not think the NHS or it's doctors are going to force anyone into doing anything.

And has been reiterated many times: there is NO force or coercion!!

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
The verb "to ensure" has as it's object, "they are eating better and exercising more." That was the phrase. That is how it is parsed.
How am I wrong in that?

Because you are only taking ONE part of the definition of how it is used and refusing to see the others.
Ergo: you end up on the wrong end of the argument and failing to see the other.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: ExiledTyrant

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
It's his MO. Find one part of one section of a hair split and then spend pages defending it as if it were the entire sole absolute truth.
Just stop playing the game with him so he can tell himself he won and we'll all get on with life.
Including grateful people in the UK diagnosed earlier with pre-diabetes.

The end or the follicle? I mean, do you choose an end to split said hair, or does it split to a point then you split another... do you pluck the hair before splitting, or swing with the ax hoping to stop at the scalp, or do you just go ahead and cleave through the skull?

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
Thinking of syntax, not grammar, you are.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Thinking of syntax, not grammar, you are.

quote:

Writing like Yoda he is.

quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

Writing like Yoda he is.

One Yoda not enough was?

Still, better than Jar Jar, Yoda is.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
Thinking of syntax, not grammar, you are.

Syntax, specifically, yes. Part of grammar, syntax is.