Ben, even if you were correct about the etymology of “dilapidated”, you would still be committing the etymological fallacy. According to the OED, dilapidated means “Fallen into ruin or disrepair; ruined, impaired, broken down.” Its etymology is irrelevant to its current meaning. A definition for the verb “delapidate” is given as “To bring (a building) into a state of decay or of partial ruin.” Certainly this does not apply to only stone buildings, and it would be uncharitable to refuse its application to a ship.

However, both of you are wrong about the etymology, according to the OED. The etymology is “to scatter as if throwing stones asunder”.

Ben is correct that a hull (well, most of it) should be below the waterline. Indeed, since the waterline is an imaginary line where the hull meets the surface of the water, it would be impossible for that not to be the case, unless the ship was not in the water (e.g. in dry dock).

What Daniel actually said was “our hull is pressed deep into the waterline”, which doesn’t make sense. He should have said “our hull is pressed deep into the water”. But we all know what he meant.

(The Plimsoll line is a line actually painted on the ship to indicate when it has reached maximum safe load. It is named after Samuel Plimsoll, who devised it against “coffin ships”; over-insured ships worth more to their owners sunk than afloat, deliberately over-filled, which often sunk taking their crew with them. The Plimsoll shoe is named after the Plimsoll line. If water gets above the rubber line of the sole, disaster!)

“Devalued” is not an intransitive verb, so a currency can’t devalue itself, but has to be devalued (by someone). But what do you say when a currency is devalued by a market – by the actions of millions of people? “Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.”

ConservativeHome are all over it and the Daily Politics made a point of how it’s become extraordinarily popular on the internet, despite not being covered by the mainstream broadcasters.