The left-handed left-clickers are a splinter group that originated in the right-click group. Even though the fundamental ideas are the same, they just could not coexist in the same group. Too much confusion.
I've been right clicking every 108 minutes for a few years now. I'm not sure what will happen if I stop, but I fear it will be really really bad. :frowning:
I heard a story about someone who has spilled a bowl of salsa on his mouse, thus rendering the right-click useless. It may just be an urban myth though.
I hadn't thought of OCD. I should have, given my experience with it. That would explain a lot.
"Right-click on a Mac, break your mother's back."
I should have told him that right-clicking is okay as long as you do it an even number of times. That would probably have worked for me back when I was captive to OCD. As you all probably know, single action events (like mouse clicks) that lead to the destruction of the Universe usually act as a toggle.
From a NYT article this morning: "one adviser said the campaign was essentially broke [...]"
The excerpt is from a news article (and a leading, front page story at that), not an editorial or opinion piece. "broke" is awfully informal for that type of story, no?
I would think "broke" means "out of money and "broken" means " needs fixing" either way it does sound informal. From the little you quoted, I don't know which meaning to use.
That's not the only difference between the NYT and the WSJ. One was formerly the worlds premier news outlet but is now mired in ideology and partisanship which has resulted in scandals, unsustantiated headline stories, and subscribers fleeing like rats from a sinking ship . . . and the other is the WSJ.