Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

548

Today, on a conference call, someone said, "it's always darkest before the dawn."

I couldn't help myself. I said, "No it isn't. It's darkest in the middle of the night, equidistant between sunset and sunrise." That got quite a few laughs.

Today, on a conference call, someone said, "it's always darkest before the dawn." I couldn't help myself. I said, "No it isn't. It's darkest in the middle of the night, equidistant between sunset and sunrise." That got quite a few laughs.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (64).
[–] • 1 pt

planning to fail.

Then you planned. That invalidates the first part of the statement. "If you fail to plan..."

If you failed because you decided to go stuff your puss with Big Macs instead, then you made a choice not to do anything. That's not planning, that's inaction.

[–] • 0 pt

Now you're just being pedantic.

[–] • 1 pt

No, it's a simple either-or. You either do this, or do that. You can't do both according to the statement, because one cancels the other.

[–] • 0 pt

You're autistically taking the point away from the statement, due to grammatical inconsistencies frying your brain-circuits. It's like the saying, "you can't fix stupid." You'd be the guy arguing, "Well, no shit. You can't increase people's IQ points. That's just retarded. And how would you fix it anyway? There's no brain surgery that would..." blah-blah-blah.

You get the point of the saying: you're simply stuck on the semantics.