Comment on A good deal of IT work, too

• TheTetrapod@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  It is

  source

  • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Nope.

    source

    • 0xD@infosec.pub ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Looks like everyone but you understood it correctly - maybe you should brush up on your language comprehension skills?

      source

      • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Maybe y’all could try having a sense of humor about things.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• name_NULL111653@pawb.social ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Take an English class, I’m sure YouTube has a good video explaining it (basically there are different “degrees” of past tense, did / had done etc.)

  source

  • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    It’s still not implicit just because you inferred it.

    source

    • TheFriendlyDickhead@lemm.ee ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Well the word “before” doesn’t need to implicit. The “had” in I’d is more than enough past for the sentence to make sense

      source

      • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        No, that simply indicated that they had not done the thing, i.e. at all.

        source
    • name_NULL111653@pawb.social ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      In the English language, an action I “had done” is before an action I “did.” It’s a grammatical case, not an inference.

      source

      • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        He stated that he had not done it, not that he had not done it before.

        source