A comma!

[chris@mastodon.mihalis.net]

@maccruiskeen @jd my point is Oxford comma should be for preventing likely wrong interpretations, or where the consequences are severe, not merely possible ones

[catsalad@infosec.exchange]

@jacobwittrock @jd Outside it's fine, just not inside.

[vonxylofon@witter.cz]

@jd They said what they said.

[north@chaos.social]

@jd "I'm smoking bare foot pets prohibited in this building." - Dracula Flow

[madargon@is-a.cat]

@alterelefant @jd now I am thinking about Yani Neko...

[peachmcd@union.place]

@X31Andy @jd

️️

[globaltom@mstdn.ca]

@jd There's no building in progress there. Would be very different if it prohibited things inside the building

[sjjh@hachyderm.io]

@Recalcitrant @jd Maybe somebody went in wearing one shoe, sniggering "I don't have bare FEET"

[maccruiskeen@social.linux.pizza]

@chris @jd It's not just bad punctuation. One time I was in a supermarket and the shopping cart had a little sign on the child seat: "Do not leave child in cart. Do not leave in parking lot.' Like, I hop no one needs to be told not to leave their child in the parking lot.

[arrrg@kolektiva.social]

@jd Put some shoes on, how hard is that?

[glitterbean@wehavecookies.social]

@jd Dude I got some fluffy bare foot pets for ya. 30$ an 8th yo. lol

[auntyalias@universeodon.com]

@jd
This got you a follow.

[longspeak@bardicperspiration.club]

@jd How do you know that's not what they mean? Huh? HUH?

[ckd@mas.to]

@jd

Why?

As long as your barefoot pet doesn't smoke, anything should be just fine?

[markstos@urbanists.social]

@arrrg @jd Have you tried to put shoes on a smoking barefoot pet before?

[edelruth@mastodon.online]

@jd

My pet would never!