umpston wrote:
On Feb 25, 6:19 pm, Michael Hoffman wrote:
umpston wrote:
On Feb 23, 5:13 pm, Michael Hoffman wrote:
umpston wrote:
On Feb 23, 4:17 pm, Michael Hoffman wrote:
David Cantrell wrote:
I notice that the announcement was about "London's transport museum"
and not the "London Transport museum". Bah.
It is a museum about transport in London so "London Transport Museum"
remained apt even after LT ceased to exist.
Yeah, but the OP said "London Transport museum" [sic].
It was a pointless change of name.
I agree but it's equally pointless to complain about it.
--
Michael Hoffman
I was merely commenting on your specious argument which seemed to be
in defence of the newer name.
Since it wasn't in defence of the new name, it is specious to make such
a comment.
--
Michael Hoffman

Well I certainly missed your point then. What was it?

A silly joke about the difference between the "London Transport museum"
[sic] and the "London Transport Museum."
--
Michael Hoffman