wanna make sense? reread what you wrote lol...
I think it was just a typo.
*you're
*your.
I think they were ralking about the second 'your' which, in fact, should be 'you're'.
No it's not, the second should be 'your'.
*talking (typo on my earlier comment)
It's supposed to be '..if you're against the matter..' not 'if your against the matter'.
It's: "If your against the matter," OP was correct. I hate it when people confuse your and you're.
If you're (you are) against the matter.
OP was right, it is easier to argue your point if you're against the matter.
OP wrote the 'you're' as 'your' though, that's what I was trying to say.
depends what your arguing about, if your supporting something that wrong then it's probably going to harder to argue since you lack actual facts.
If you support the matter, you wouldn't be arguing.
wanna make sense? reread what you wrote lol...
I think it was just a typo.
*you're
*your.
I think they were ralking about the second 'your' which, in fact, should be 'you're'.
No it's not, the second should be 'your'.
*talking (typo on my earlier comment)
It's supposed to be '..if you're against the matter..' not 'if your against the matter'.
It's: "If your against the matter," OP was correct. I hate it when people confuse your and you're.
If you're (you are) against the matter.
OP was right, it is easier to argue your point if you're against the matter.
OP wrote the 'you're' as 'your' though, that's what I was trying to say.
depends what your arguing about, if your supporting something that wrong then it's probably going to harder to argue since you lack actual facts.
If you support the matter, you wouldn't be arguing.