"No M&M's" True or False?
 

Here's the scenario:

We're sitting on the couch. There is a bowl in front of us on the coffee table. In the bowl are more than 40 green M&M's. Additionally, there are 2 red M&M's in the bowl. (There is nothing in the bowl except the 40+ green and 2 red M&M's.)

You ask me how many M&M's are in the bowl.

Here's my response: "No M&M's"

You say to me, "But, there are more than 40 M&M's in the bowl, and there are two red M&M's in the bowl."

Here's my response: "Yes, but I don't count the green ones."

Now, I'm curious to know your opinion: Is the statement "No M&M's" true or false in this situation?

This is not a trick question. I'm just looking for your instinctive, common-sense response to the question: Is the statement "No M&M's" true or false?

Crack is a horrible, horrible drug.

I don't get it

"crack is a horrible drug"

lol...fair enough.:)

I rest my case.

You're not making any sense.

Neither do I...figuratively speaking, there are 40+ green M&M's and 2 red M&M's in the bowl, and someone keeps telling me, "We don't count green M&M's. Therefore, it's correct for us to say 'No M&M's.'"

My point exactly! :thumbsup

Fuck lost me too, all I know is the red ones color comes from a crushed up insect.

Are you daltonic? Is that it??

even if you dont count the green ones there are still 2 red ones there...thus there are m&m's in the bowl:2 cents:

there might not be "M&M's" but there sure is "M&M"s ??

I agree! There are M&M's in the bowl!! There are 40+ green M&M's and then there are also 2 red M&M's...so how can it be that "No M&M's" is true!?! "No M&M's" must be false, right?

42 W&W!

8chsrs

Yeah, except for the fact that it's standard English to place an apostrophe after abbreviations to indicate both the possessive and plural forms.

correct.....and for the record i dont think you are on crack....but you should lay off the acid:upsidedow

Yeah, except for the fact that it's standard English to place an apostrophe plus "s" after abbreviations to indicate the plural, thereby avoiding awkward formulations such as "M&M"s.

hence the ?? at the end :winkwink:

lol...I'm with you. I feel your pain...because of course in actuality, I'm the one on the receiving end of this nonsense!

My site has over 40 full-length streamed videos, and a couple of my own. However, someone has posted online that my site has "No videos." When I ask them to change this, they refuse, on the basis that they don't count the streamed vids. And, there is no indication on this page that by "No videos" they really mean "mostly streamed videos and a couple proprietary ones."

To make matters worse, they have this "No videos" statement listed as one of the "Cons" of my site.

hehe...oops :)

Huh, I'm not a native speaker, but since when is it standard English to place an apostrophe behind an abbreviation to indicate the plural form?

OK, then... False.

:ticking

Maybe you're confused because there's only one "m" printed on each candy... and for "m&m's" to be valid, you'd need at least 2 sets of them (4 candies for 2 sets of "m&m", thus giving them a plural)?

But, the individual candies are actually called "an m&m"... so that logic would be flawed... and, even if that's not where you're coming from, green m&m's are still m&m's... so you're a crazy bastard for not counting them in the first place.

:)

(plus an s of course)

If there's 2 red M&M's and you aren't counting green M&M's, then there can never be "No M&M's" unless you are also not counting red M&M's.

And unless you've been to some shitty little villagesque festival which has a game to "Guess the number of M&M's to win a prize", put that crackpipe down.

the apostrophe in "M&M's" only indicates possessive form, if that wasn't clear (Mars and Murie's)

The question and the metaphor were so unclear this thread has gone way beyond its original intents...

I couldn't agree more. Any way you slice it, if there are M&M's in the bowl, whether they be green, red, fuchsia, etc. it is false to say "No M&M's." So, how can it be true to say "No videos" as one of the "Cons" of my site, when in fact my site has over 40 videos?

K, pulling the memory from my writing instruction...

Lowercase letters and acronyms or abbreviations with punctuation at the end (example: "m," "k," "P.H.D.," "C.I.A.," and "in.") use an apostrophe before the "s" when making them plural.

But you really shouldn't use periods in acronyms and abbreviations, anyways, unless it's to avoid confusion (such as in "in." for "inches", as "in" is actually a word with another meaning).

Technically, it wouldn't be proper in the case of capital letters and acronyms or abbreviations without punctuation (example: "M," "K," "PHD," "CIA," and "in"), but it's often used.

So, technically, "M's" - though used often - would be incorrect. "Ms" would be correct. "M&Ms" is actually correct while "M&M's" is, technically, incorrect, I believe

The plural, "m's," would be correct, and "ms" would be incorrect, no matter how you slice it. Same for "m&m's" (correct) and "m&ms" (incorrect).



Still, I, personally, find myself applying apostrophes to the end of acronyms and abbreviations all the time, even though it's not, technically, correct to do so... it's kinda become accepted (though incorrect) practice for all letters, acronyms, and abbreviations when, in fact, it's only correct for lower-case letters and abbreviations or acronyms ending in a period.

Off topic: Did you get my ICQ about the text links?

errr... there are plenty of M&Ms in the bowl.

there is no spoon

holy fuck, you should go get your head checked, you fucking loon.

I think we have a winner :pimp

Well... in that case, I guess it would depend greatly on the definition of term "video."

I have no idea what you're referring to, or who said what, but, in my ignorance of those facts, I can say that, technically, video stills are still regarded as "video" but I doubt anyone boasting nothing but 2 gigs of video stills would claim to have "video" on their site.

I guess the same concept could be expanded to incorporate other, more specific, definitions of "video"... I mean, if you're talking 40 2-minute clips, and a couple full-length scenes, maybe the whole thing would be better served by better qualifying the word... instead of using "video," use "limited selection of video" or what-have you however fits the situation.

But, for what it's worth, imho... in that scenario, you'd still have m&m's. :)

Yes, but don't you see D, that's just it!! Usage and correctness...there is a point at which they become impossible to untangle from one another. I say that's where the capitalized acronym/abbreviation plus apostrophe+"s" in the case of plurality dwells currently, while you say it yet resides outside the sheltering umbrella we call standard English.

Who is to decide?

And another question...just what the fuck, exactly, is "M&M"...is it an acronym or abbreviation at all? Is it just a name? And if that's true, then where the hell does that leave us?

Ahh... missed this post earlier...

Well, not having heard the reviewer's side yet, that sounds kinda goofy.

"No (or 'minimal') Downloads" sounds a lot more apt.

Thanks for the explanation. I think M&M's (where the 's indicates possessive form) is in itself already a 'plural' unit (like water). I don't think you can call the individual chocolates "an M&M" (or "an M&M's", for that matter).

The thing with the period-restricted abbreviations is interesting, I guess it would indeed look strange to have a period, then an s. But seeing PC's or CD's for sale really irritates me!

one hand, clapping.

yeah.

...oh well, fuck it. Anyhoo, at this point, for me, it's really all about the semantic implications, the linguistics at the heart of the matter.