I'll introduce you to Gregory

I don't follow.

It doesn't necessarily mean that Gregory is there at all. It could just mean "sometime, in the future, a year from now maybe, I will introduce you to this guy named Gregory."

And I hereby go on strike from answering these if you refuse to provide context! I don't really get why you don't.

Context is vital.

This is an etiquette issue.

(I'll find a link, be right back)

read more here

Someone does follow!

That someone stumbled on what you were looking for is not evidence that you presented your question in a reasonable manner. I fully concur in the criticism that you consistently fail to provide context, which makes it much more difficult for people here to answer your questions. Given that i have taken from other statements you've made an inference that you are doing translations, for which i suspect you are paid, it is little enough to ask that you cooperate with those from whom you seek answers by providing context.

The formalities of introduction are completely different in "non-business" situations from that which is outlined above. In social situations in the English-speaking world, the criterion for proper etiquette is gender followed by age. One addresses the oldest female, and introduces her first to the females, from oldest to youngest, and then to the males, from oldest to youngest. That is completely divergent from the business etiquette outlined above. But how can anyone be expected to reasonably answer your question, when you provide no context?

I'll introduce you to Gregory
It really is important to know the context of the texts you are asking about. Very often knowing the context can prevent us from giving a perfectly reasonable, but in the particular case in question, totally wrong answer.

I'm joining soz's picket line.

I can only tell you that Gregory is a much less important person of the two.
I count on scabs.

Um.

What do you mean?

I suspect he refers to scab as in a non-union worker who crosses a picket line. I suspect that he means that even if the people here who are tired of his games won't answer his questions, he'll still be able to make money as a translator by relying upon other members at this site to answer his questions.

That is sufficient for me, however. It's bad enough that he uses us to further the work for which he is paid. But that he'd adopt such a haughty and arrogant attitude when he is simply asked to provide context is sufficient to convince me that i have no reason to help him again.

I'm on strike also. It's bordering on rude that you refuse.

I'll introduce you to Gregory


BTW - Your phrase "a much less important person" isn't quite correct. One of the phrases below should be used instead:

the much less important person of the two
much the less important person of the two
a much less important person than the other
a person of much less importance than the other

It's the use of "a" when making such a specific comparison that is inappropriate. The phrase "the other" makes the whole sentence more general, and in that case, "a" is okay to use.

'll introduce you to Gregory
That's it. I think you should do your own work from now on.

The context was given, there's more art in it than money, but I'm slowly moving to a professional forum, yes. I will remain, though, on A2K in other sections.

hopefully you will learn some good manners in meanwhile.

And, for the record, the context was NOT given...hence the nature of the comments.

It had been such a peaceful forum, and then Ragman came.

Relax, just relax.

Bullshit . . . don't try to hang this on Ragman. Soz complained about your consistent refusal to provide context in the second response to this thread.