1771: "It Was I"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
thunk
Posts: 440
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2016 3:29 am UTC
Location: Arguably Exiled

1771: "It Was I"

Postby thunk » Mon Dec 12, 2016 6:02 am UTC

Image

Alt-text: "It me, your father."

It was you, clearly.
Free markets, free movement, free plops
Blitz on, my friends Quantized, GnomeAnne, and iskinner!
troo dat

User avatar
rhomboidal
Posts: 759
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 5:25 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby rhomboidal » Mon Dec 12, 2016 6:16 am UTC

Even Sith Lords tremble before Grammar Nazis.

NaCl
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2016 5:40 am UTC

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby NaCl » Mon Dec 12, 2016 6:18 am UTC

Personally, I don't feel we've gone fully into archaism until I can spot Chaucer sitting outside the window of our domicile being the literary equivalent of the town gossip.

Oh, and Vader's correct, of course. "It was I" can be continued without a break. "It was me" is a declaration that should always be the end of a sentence.

Eutychus
Posts: 431
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 6:01 am UTC
Location: France

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby Eutychus » Mon Dec 12, 2016 6:38 am UTC

Shouldn't that be "faced with"?
Be very careful about rectilinear assumptions. Raptors could be hiding there - ucim

User avatar
flicky1991
Like in Cinderella?
Posts: 619
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 3:36 pm UTC
Location: London

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby flicky1991 » Mon Dec 12, 2016 6:42 am UTC

I don't want to live in a world where the object of "to be" gets an accusative pronoun, because that gives us "Whom are you?"
any pronouns
----
Discord for Forum Games posters
(Please let me know if the link doesn't work)

User avatar
da Doctah
Posts: 805
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 6:27 am UTC

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby da Doctah » Mon Dec 12, 2016 6:55 am UTC

Aw, c'mon! In a galaxy where there are people who talk like Yoda and others who talk like Jar-Jar Binks, and nobody says boo to either of them, you're going to make a big deal about this?

kevo31415
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2016 7:01 am UTC

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby kevo31415 » Mon Dec 12, 2016 7:03 am UTC

I disagree with the message here. English copulas take nominative predicates. It's ok in everyday parlance to use the accusative because it "sounds more normal" and we shouldn't be too nitpicky about grammar in casual settings, but to say the correct usage is wrong is quite off base.

If you called me on the phone and asked "Is this Kevin?" and I answered, "Yes, this is he," would you correct me?

User avatar
Copper Bezel
Posts: 2416
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:35 am UTC
Location: Web exclusive!

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby Copper Bezel » Mon Dec 12, 2016 7:05 am UTC

flicky1991 wrote:I don't want to live in a world where the object of "to be" gets an accusative pronoun, because that gives us "Whom are you?"

Lucky that "whom" is disappearing entirely, then....

Plus, I actually don't think your math works on the first place. If it's "I am Fred" but "Fred is me", it would never be "Whom are" in the first place.
So much depends upon a red wheel barrow (>= XXII) but it is not going to be installed.

she / her / her

User avatar
flicky1991
Like in Cinderella?
Posts: 619
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 3:36 pm UTC
Location: London

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby flicky1991 » Mon Dec 12, 2016 7:15 am UTC

Copper Bezel wrote:Plus, I actually don't think your math works on the first place. If it's "I am Fred" but "Fred is me", it would never be "Whom are" in the first place.

If "who" were the subject, it would be "Who is you?" The "are" indicates that "you" is the subject.
any pronouns
----
Discord for Forum Games posters
(Please let me know if the link doesn't work)

User avatar
azule
Saved
Posts: 2132
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 9:45 pm UTC
Location: The land of the Golden Puppies and Rainbows

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby azule » Mon Dec 12, 2016 7:28 am UTC

thunk wrote:Image

Alt-text: "It me, your father."

It you, clearly.

FTFY
Image

If you read this sig, post about one arbitrary thing you did today.

I celebrate up to six arbitrary things before breakfast.
Time does drag on and on and contain spoilers. Be aware of memes.

User avatar
chridd
Has a vermicelli title
Posts: 761
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 10:07 am UTC
Location: ...Earth, I guess?
Contact:

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby chridd » Mon Dec 12, 2016 7:58 am UTC

I not familiar with the construction "it me". It confusing at first. It dialectal, or some sort of meme (like lolspeak or I accidentally), or reference to some work, or something made up for the comic?
~ chri d. d. /tʃɹɪ.di.di/ (Phonotactics, schmphonotactics) · they (for now, at least) · Forum game scores
mittfh wrote:I wish this post was very quotable...
flicky1991 wrote:In both cases the quote is "I'm being quoted too much!"

ThemePark
Posts: 450
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2008 5:42 pm UTC
Location: Århus, Denmark

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby ThemePark » Mon Dec 12, 2016 8:10 am UTC

Itsa me, Mario!
I have traveled from 1979 to be a member of the unofficial board Council of Elders. Phear M3

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2691
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby orthogon » Mon Dec 12, 2016 9:05 am UTC

Steven Pinker wrote: The rule [that a pronoun serving as the complement of be must be in nominative case] is a product of the usual three confusions: English with Latin, informal style with incorrect grammar, and syntax with semantics.


I wonder whether Randall has been reading A Sense of Style...

Linguistics and Star Wars. What's not to like?
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
Copper Bezel
Posts: 2416
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:35 am UTC
Location: Web exclusive!

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby Copper Bezel » Mon Dec 12, 2016 9:54 am UTC

flicky1991 wrote:
Copper Bezel wrote:Plus, I actually don't think your math works on the first place. If it's "I am Fred" but "Fred is me", it would never be "Whom are" in the first place.

If "who" were the subject, it would be "Who is you?" The "are" indicates that "you" is the subject.

Well, no, because "who" has no number. Again, I'm not offering a counterproposal, but your math continues to be dubious.
So much depends upon a red wheel barrow (>= XXII) but it is not going to be installed.

she / her / her

User avatar
chridd
Has a vermicelli title
Posts: 761
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 10:07 am UTC
Location: ...Earth, I guess?
Contact:

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby chridd » Mon Dec 12, 2016 11:34 am UTC

Copper Bezel wrote:
flicky1991 wrote:
Copper Bezel wrote:Plus, I actually don't think your math works on the first place. If it's "I am Fred" but "Fred is me", it would never be "Whom are" in the first place.

If "who" were the subject, it would be "Who is you?" The "are" indicates that "you" is the subject.

Well, no, because "who" has no number. Again, I'm not offering a counterproposal, but your math continues to be dubious.
Other points in favor of you being the subject there:
Who are you not? makes more sense than *Who are not you?; compare, Who am I not seeing? (I is subject, not comes after the subject), and Who is not seeing me? (who is subject, not comes right after is).
Who am I?: who could be indeterminate in number and take either form, but being able to take a first person form would be much weirder.
and, most relevant to the form in question:
• If who were the subject and we followed the object-form rule this comic is talking about, then we'd get sentences like Who is him?, which is clearly worse and the original point still stands.

Still, we probably wouldn't get "Whom are you?", because it seems unlikely to me that anyone who'd say "It was me" would also use "whom" for direct objects in the same context/level of formality (since "whom" seems more formal/prescriptivist/old-fashioned than "it was I", at least to me).
~ chri d. d. /tʃɹɪ.di.di/ (Phonotactics, schmphonotactics) · they (for now, at least) · Forum game scores
mittfh wrote:I wish this post was very quotable...
flicky1991 wrote:In both cases the quote is "I'm being quoted too much!"

User avatar
cellocgw
Posts: 1760
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 7:40 pm UTC

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby cellocgw » Mon Dec 12, 2016 12:29 pm UTC

flicky1991 wrote:
Copper Bezel wrote:Plus, I actually don't think your math works on the first place. If it's "I am Fred" but "Fred is me", it would never be "Whom are" in the first place.

If "who" were the subject, it would be "Who is you?" The "are" indicates that "you" is the subject.


Actually[1} it would be "Who's on first."


[1] 1318
https://app.box.com/witthoftresume
Former OTTer
Vote cellocgw for President 2020. #ScienceintheWhiteHouse http://cellocgw.wordpress.com
"The Planck length is 3.81779e-33 picas." -- keithl
" Earth weighs almost exactly π milliJupiters" -- what-if #146, note 7

User avatar
Weeks
Hey Baby, wanna make a fortnight?
Posts: 1858
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:41 am UTC
Location: Panama

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby Weeks » Mon Dec 12, 2016 12:32 pm UTC

Image
Am I gregnant
suffer-cait wrote:One day I'm gun a go visit weeks and discover they're just a computer in a trashcan at an ice cream shop.
Quercus wrote:Agreed, but "constitutional fetishism" doesn't have that lovely alliteration between fetishism, first and fucking
rath358 wrote:I have been replaced D:

User avatar
GlassHouses
Posts: 56
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2016 12:41 pm UTC

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby GlassHouses » Mon Dec 12, 2016 12:34 pm UTC

Approaching "who are you" from another angle, it's an interrogative form, which in modern English is usually formed using "to do": compare archaic "what say you" with modern "what do you say." The verb "to be" just happens to be immune from the "to do" variation.

Based on that analogy, "who" would be the object.

User avatar
flicky1991
Like in Cinderella?
Posts: 619
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 3:36 pm UTC
Location: London

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby flicky1991 » Mon Dec 12, 2016 12:57 pm UTC

Copper Bezel wrote:Well, no, because "who" has no number.

"The man, who comes from London..."
"The men, who come from London..."
Yes it does.
Then again, "You, who comes from London..." sounds wrong to me - I'm tempted to say "come" even if talking about just one person... so maybe it's based on both number and person, like other pronouns. In which case, "Who are you" is still ambiguous.

GlassHouses wrote:Based on that analogy, "who" would be the object.

That works just as well if "who" is the subject though - "Who said that?" has exactly the same structure as "Who are you?" and has "who" as the subject...

To conclude, I retract my earlier viewpoint and concede that I have no idea what the subject of "Who are you?" is.

----

EDIT:

I just considered "Who am I?", but even that doesn't disambiguate. "I, who am a Londoner..."
any pronouns
----
Discord for Forum Games posters
(Please let me know if the link doesn't work)

User avatar
cellocgw
Posts: 1760
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 7:40 pm UTC

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby cellocgw » Mon Dec 12, 2016 1:18 pm UTC

Who are you?
Doot-doot ; doot-doot;
who are you, you you you--oo --oo
I really wanna know

(god I hate that song)
https://app.box.com/witthoftresume
Former OTTer
Vote cellocgw for President 2020. #ScienceintheWhiteHouse http://cellocgw.wordpress.com
"The Planck length is 3.81779e-33 picas." -- keithl
" Earth weighs almost exactly π milliJupiters" -- what-if #146, note 7

User avatar
HokieNerd
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2014 1:18 pm UTC
Location: Dahlgren, VA

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby HokieNerd » Mon Dec 12, 2016 2:35 pm UTC

Whew, glad somebody cleared that one up.

Now, if somebody could explain what he's saying WRT the "centrally moon", that'd be just greaaaaaat. :?

User avatar
Murderbot
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 9:29 am UTC

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby Murderbot » Mon Dec 12, 2016 3:13 pm UTC

Is the Emperor sitting on a talking chair, like Stephen Hawking?
da Doctah wrote:Aw, c'mon! In a galaxy where there are people who talk like Yoda and others who talk like Jar-Jar Binks, and nobody says boo to either of them, you're going to make a big deal about this?
I think we should hold the Emperor of the Free World to a higher standard than a bumbling buffoon and a mystical monk.
Last edited by Murderbot on Mon Dec 12, 2016 3:16 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

miket
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 5:58 am UTC

Postby miket » Mon Dec 12, 2016 3:13 pm UTC

It is I who thinks that the impertenent boy should be left dangling on the ceiling.

Then there is my favorite exchange in all of television:
Sir Humphrey: The identity of the official whose alleged responsibility for this hypothetical oversight has been the subject of recent discussion is not shrouded in quite such impenetrable obscurity as certain previous disclosures may have led you to assume; but not to put too fine a point on it, the individual in question is, it may surprise you to learn, one whom your present interlocutor is in the habit of defining by means of the perpendicular pronoun.
Hacker: I beg your pardon?
Sir Humphrey: It was... I.

BrandonH66
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2016 4:29 pm UTC

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby BrandonH66 » Mon Dec 12, 2016 3:35 pm UTC

HokieNerd wrote:Whew, glad somebody cleared that one up.

Now, if somebody could explain what he's saying WRT the "centrally moon", that'd be just greaaaaaat. :?


He's actually saying "Sanctuary moon of Endor." This is harder to hear becuase it is one of very few times that the moon is referred to in this manner.

The Emperor's original line about allowing the Rebel Alliance to learn a lot of information continues to sound great and correct in Return of the Jedi.

User avatar
cellocgw
Posts: 1760
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 7:40 pm UTC

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby cellocgw » Mon Dec 12, 2016 4:11 pm UTC

Murderbot wrote:Is the Emperor sitting on a talking chair, like Stephen Hawking?
da Doctah wrote:Aw, c'mon! In a galaxy where there are people who talk like Yoda and others who talk like Jar-Jar Binks, and nobody says boo to either of them, you're going to make a big deal about this?
I think we should hold the Emperor of the Free World to a higher standard than a bumbling buffoon and a mystical monk.


Wait, are we still talking about StarWars or did you switch to PEOTUS?
https://app.box.com/witthoftresume
Former OTTer
Vote cellocgw for President 2020. #ScienceintheWhiteHouse http://cellocgw.wordpress.com
"The Planck length is 3.81779e-33 picas." -- keithl
" Earth weighs almost exactly π milliJupiters" -- what-if #146, note 7

User avatar
freezeblade
Posts: 1076
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 5:11 pm UTC
Location: Oakland

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby freezeblade » Mon Dec 12, 2016 4:58 pm UTC

cellocgw wrote:
Murderbot wrote:Is the Emperor sitting on a talking chair, like Stephen Hawking?
da Doctah wrote:Aw, c'mon! In a galaxy where there are people who talk like Yoda and others who talk like Jar-Jar Binks, and nobody says boo to either of them, you're going to make a big deal about this?
I think we should hold the Emperor of the Free World to a higher standard than a bumbling buffoon and a mystical monk.


Wait, are we still talking about StarWars or did you switch to PEOTUS?

I'm guessing both, as Trump is the Emperor.
Belial wrote:I am not even in the same country code as "the mood for this shit."

User avatar
WibblyWobbly
Can't Get No
Posts: 506
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2013 1:03 pm UTC

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby WibblyWobbly » Mon Dec 12, 2016 6:49 pm UTC

kevo31415 wrote:If you called me on the phone and asked "Is this Kevin?" and I answered, "Yes, this is he," would you correct me?


Yes, but only to request you say instead "I am he" and then break out into "I Am the Walrus."

aerion111
Posts: 22
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2011 11:53 pm UTC

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby aerion111 » Mon Dec 12, 2016 7:30 pm UTC

Murderbot wrote:Is the Emperor sitting on a talking chair, like Stephen Hawking?
da Doctah wrote:Aw, c'mon! In a galaxy where there are people who talk like Yoda and others who talk like Jar-Jar Binks, and nobody says boo to either of them, you're going to make a big deal about this?
I think we should hold the Emperor of the Free World to a higher standard than a bumbling buffoon and a mystical monk.

I assume you meant that irrespective?
Though I suppose there is a case to be made for calling Yoda a buffoon at times, and Jar-Jar certainly has some monk-like qualities at times.

User avatar
kalira
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 5:03 pm UTC

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby kalira » Mon Dec 12, 2016 7:44 pm UTC

da Doctah wrote:Aw, c'mon! In a galaxy where there are people who talk like Yoda and others who talk like Jar-Jar Binks, and nobody says boo to either of them, you're going to make a big deal about this?


Well, GrammarNazi!Luke never met JarJar. And as far as Yoda goes, don't you think it's a little suspicious he suddenly dies right as Luke gets back to him from Cloud City when he wasn't at all ill beforehand? Clearly faked his death so as to avoid any more annoying lectures from GN!Luke regarding his way of speaking.
plytho wrote:Isn't bowling just a subcategory of pottery?

User avatar
somitomi
Posts: 440
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2015 11:21 pm UTC
Location: can be found in Hungary
Contact:

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby somitomi » Mon Dec 12, 2016 9:03 pm UTC

WibblyWobbly wrote:
kevo31415 wrote:If you called me on the phone and asked "Is this Kevin?" and I answered, "Yes, this is he," would you correct me?


Yes, but only to request you say instead "I am he" and then break out into "I Am the Walrus."

You say goodbye, I say hello.
Image
they/them/theirs = he/him/his ❖ If you want to use something else out of dadaist spite, I won't mind.
✆ Hello? This is Forum Games Discord, what is your emergency?

gd1
Posts: 59
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2012 5:42 am UTC

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby gd1 » Mon Dec 12, 2016 10:37 pm UTC

Weeks wrote:Image


Sona... Masaka... Bakana...

ps.02
Posts: 378
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2013 8:02 pm UTC

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby ps.02 » Mon Dec 12, 2016 10:48 pm UTC

flicky1991 wrote:That works just as well if "who" is the subject though - "Who said that?" has exactly the same structure as "Who are you?" and has "who" as the subject...

The apparent grammatical parallel doesn't hold up when you bring in semantics, though, nor for that matter when you look closer at the grammar: to say is transitive, to be is not.

Anyway, it gets clearer if you put the verb into other tenses. E.g., "Who would you rather be?" or "Who might you have been?" Which clearly do not mean "Who would rather be you?" or "Who might have been you?"

Alternatively, substitute somebody for who:
- Somebody said that. (subj.: somebody)
- *Somebody is you. (subj: somebody)
- You are somebody. (subj: you)
The second line is grammatical, but poorly matches the semantics of the question.

User avatar
flicky1991
Like in Cinderella?
Posts: 619
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 3:36 pm UTC
Location: London

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby flicky1991 » Tue Dec 13, 2016 12:29 am UTC

ps.02 wrote:Alternatively, substitute somebody for who:
- Somebody said that. (subj.: somebody)
- *Somebody is you. (subj: somebody)
- You are somebody. (subj: you)
The second line is grammatical, but poorly matches the semantics of the question.

Ah, now this one has me quite convinced.

OK, I go back to my original position. "You" is the subject of "Who are you?". Therefore, if you say "It is me.", then you'd logically say "Whom are you?", if you are the kind of person who says "whom".

Right? :mrgreen:
any pronouns
----
Discord for Forum Games posters
(Please let me know if the link doesn't work)

rmsgrey
Posts: 3077
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby rmsgrey » Tue Dec 13, 2016 1:01 am UTC

flicky1991 wrote:OK, I go back to my original position. "You" is the subject of "Who are you?". Therefore, if you say "It is me.", then you'd logically say "Whom are you?", if you are the kind of person who says "whom".

Right? :mrgreen:


I think I need to see that written down before I can get it straight.

User avatar
zjxs
Posts: 48
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2009 6:04 am UTC
Location: Te Ao

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby zjxs » Tue Dec 13, 2016 1:27 am UTC

chridd wrote:I not familiar with the construction "it me". It confusing at first. It dialectal, or some sort of meme (like lolspeak or I accidentally), or reference to some work, or something made up for the comic?


It meme.

commodorejohn
Posts: 958
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 6:21 pm UTC
Location: Placerville, CA
Contact:

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby commodorejohn » Tue Dec 13, 2016 3:33 am UTC

I like narrow-shouldered slouchy Vader. He looks like he should be the hapless protagonist in an office sitcom.
"'Legacy code' often differs from its suggested alternative by actually working and scaling."
- Bjarne Stroustrup
www.commodorejohn.com - in case you were wondering, which you probably weren't.

ps.02
Posts: 378
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2013 8:02 pm UTC

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby ps.02 » Tue Dec 13, 2016 6:57 am UTC

flicky1991 wrote:"You" is the subject of "Who are you?". Therefore, if you say "It is me.", then you'd logically say "Whom are you?", if you are the kind of person who says "whom".

Well... are there people who simultaneously want to reach for the formality of whom but the informality of It is me? Maybe some. Maybe it's some of the same people who think the plural of virus is *virii (and therefore the singular for radii is *radus).

User avatar
flicky1991
Like in Cinderella?
Posts: 619
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 3:36 pm UTC
Location: London

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby flicky1991 » Tue Dec 13, 2016 7:10 am UTC

I never saw "whom" as formal - just following an older standard.
any pronouns
----
Discord for Forum Games posters
(Please let me know if the link doesn't work)

Mikeski
Posts: 871
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:24 am UTC
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby Mikeski » Tue Dec 13, 2016 8:20 am UTC

da Doctah wrote:Aw, c'mon! In a galaxy where there are people who talk like Yoda and others who talk like Jar-Jar Binks, and nobody says boo to either of them, you're going to make a big deal about this?

But they aren't human. We don't expect those people to speak correctly...

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2691
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1771: "It Was I"

Postby orthogon » Tue Dec 13, 2016 9:08 am UTC

ps.02 wrote:Alternatively, substitute somebody for who:
- Somebody said that. (subj.: somebody)
- *Somebody is you. (subj: somebody)
- You are somebody. (subj: you)

Damn right, I'm somebody!

EDIT: linkified, for those who've yet to discover Fred Wesley and the J.B.s.

ETA: I'd forgotten about the massive vibroslap hit at the very end.
Last edited by orthogon on Tue Dec 13, 2016 9:37 am UTC, edited 2 times in total.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: TV4Fun and 40 guests