Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

intheflow

(28,473 posts)

16. If you didn't know what it meant,

Reply to erronis (Reply #14)

Fri Dec 3, 2021, 06:52 PM

Dec 2021

you could have replied, "What's ffs mean? n/t"

That way you could interact with them as if there was an actual person on the other end of the post instead of jumping on them because they didn't live up to your snobbish standards of the needed depth of every post on DU.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

38 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Court mulls: Was Trump's reply to rape claim part of job? [View all] turbinetree Dec 2021 OP

Oh ffs Fullduplexxx Dec 2021 #1

Pithy comment. Does it actually have any useful content? erronis Dec 2021 #5

Oh, ffs, it's a perfectly fine post. intheflow Dec 2021 #11

So for us neophytes, we need to spend time looking up "ffs"? And does that help the conversation? erronis Dec 2021 #14

If you didn't know what it meant, intheflow Dec 2021 #16

You're also ignoring that the original comment had no context. Just a "ffs". erronis Dec 2021 #24

FFS is self-explanatory to anyone who's been conscious and online more than 45 seconds Orrex Dec 2021 #25

Thank you Fullduplexxx Dec 2021 #30

I never saw the term before but understood right away what it meant. Peregrine Took Dec 2021 #32

LOL Beartracks Dec 2021 #37

It's a perfect response Karma13612 Dec 2021 #29

+100 Peregrine Took Dec 2021 #33

My first thought was ffs too! Next word I thought of was "ridiculous." Greybnk48 Dec 2021 #7

Exactly.. thank you Fullduplexxx Dec 2021 #31

Agreed. dchill Dec 2021 #21

Agree 100% Karma13612 Dec 2021 #28

I do not have any idea what it means, and I won't bother looking it up. marie999 Dec 2021 #34

You forgot the harumph ....well You're not missing anything Fullduplexxx Dec 2021 #35

Who in current Justice Dept. is behind this? Who? paleotn Dec 2021 #2

Doesn't sound like DOJ is on board, but rather could be decided by a GQP judge groundloop Dec 2021 #8

Three judge court with one Trump and two Clinton appointees. onenote Dec 2021 #18

"Justice Department lawyer Mark Freeman" iemanja Dec 2021 #13

Does that mean the president of the USA is a KING? That is what it sounds like... Escurumbele Dec 2021 #3

Our DOJ in action. Scrivener7 Dec 2021 #4

Dept of Justice my foot. The DOJ should NOT be defending Trump. What he said was horrible Trueblue1968 Dec 2021 #10

WOW! i couldn't agree MORE bluestarone Dec 2021 #19

what a film-flam rurallib Dec 2021 #6

Wonkette was liveblogging the hearing Zorro Dec 2021 #9

Thanks elleng Dec 2021 #12

Aside from the Tax Bill that Mitch put in front of him Dan Dec 2021 #15

I wonder if they would be taking this same tact if it was over the rape of a child. nt chowder66 Dec 2021 #17

Goes to show, gab13by13 Dec 2021 #20

It's shameful iemanja Dec 2021 #22

Ahem. This is all ridiculous. In 2016 We The People elected H. R. Clinton as abqtommy Dec 2021 #23

It Is Said That A Good Lawyer Can Indict A Ham Sandwich Before A Grand Jury DallasNE Dec 2021 #26

You are correct, gab13by13 Dec 2021 #27

If TFG is the defendant, he has to pay his legal bills. If the court rules LastLiberal in PalmSprings Dec 2021 #36

He isn't in prison yet? twodogsbarking Dec 2021 #38