I've noticed that many of the forum discussions that TA has tweeted lately have contained glaring grammatical and spelling errors. I find this disappointing and even personally embarrassing as it inevitably reflects not only on the original poster but on the forum as a whole and, by extension, the larger atheist community. I know written communication isn't everything, and it certainly isn't a high priority among the public generally, but we should try to meet a higher standard. Given the unlikelihood that individual posters will suddenly take more care when writing, I think the operators of the site's Twitter feed should consider not tweeting discussion titles with serious errors.
That's one poster's opinion, for whatever it's worth.
Ah, defending "misuse" makes more sense to me than defending "illiteracy".
I won't defend intentional illiteracy, but I do appreciate intelligent "misuse".
Unless you think literacy and illiteracy is a binary condition, there are shades of illiteracy. People who don't seem to know how to use capitalization, commas, periods, conjugate common verbs, and so on, are illiterate by degree.
I appreciate intelligent misuse where it belongs: in creative writing, not expository writing.
I think when grammar-nazism is brutally enforced it scares off younger more illiterate members who may be already having problems escaping religion. For me, clearly expressing an idea trumps the odd grammar/spelling mistake. Of course, if the grammar is egregiously bad then that's a different story. A balance in between should be found.
We are talking about egregiously bad spelling and grammar. You might call me a "grammar Nazi," but I will freely admit to being a grammar mortal. Most of the time I see my mistake upon a second glance, but not always. People who make the occasional mistake are NOT who we are talking about.
Why Unseen! What a pleasant surprise! That's a total crock - your response is neither a surprise, nor particularly pleasant, though I do take some enjoyment in your predictability.
RE: "People who make the occasional mistake are NOT who we are talking about." - so, just so I fully understand the rules, you're saying that if one were to accidentally say - oh, I don't know - "Luthor," when he intended to say, "Luther," that it's something we should all overlook?
Not if you can see him.
No Blaine, but I wouldn't discount the converse --
In your estimation, are younger people less literate on average than older people? I don't generally find this to be the case in my personal experiences, but admittedly, I have minimal interaction with teenagers.
are grammar nazis the moral analog of texter dexters?
i'll delete this if nobody laughs
hehe my excuse is that I am dyslexic