Official SciForums grammar nazis

Discussion in 'Site Feedback' started by domesticated om, Nov 10, 2010.

  1. domesticated om Stickler for details Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,277
    Just for the heck of it, I have an idea for a new SciForums sub-group:
    Spell checkers

    If there is a way to do this, people who belong to the spell-checker group are granted permission to edit post content and thread titles globally (excluding content submitted from moderators).
    As a rule, the spell checkers are not authorized to outright rephrase or delete content submitted by other members --- only to correct spelling, add punctuation, or correct poor letter casing where applicable. They are required to do it quietly (simply make the correction and move on).
    Spell checkers are not authorized to point out or highlight any misspellings. For example: if they make changes, they can't do it in red text. They are only explicitly permitted to quietly fix it.

    Members who belong to the spell-checker group would have to be appointed by admin, and have their edit functionality revoked if they abuse it.

    Also -- people in the group are required to make exceptions where necessary. For example... someone like Cluelesshusband's or Asgard's posts would be totally off limits.

    Think something like this would work?
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    37,189
    No, it wouldn't work - mainly because we couldn't trust people just to correct spelling and grammar and to do no other editing. Also, some people don't like their spelling and grammar being criticised.

    What you could do is use the current thread to post examples of bad spelling and grammar from other posts on the forum.
     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. superstring01 Moderator

    Messages:
    12,110
    Besides, with a bunch of folks on this website who spell program as "programme", aluminum as "aluminium", labor as "labour", color as "colour" and vagina as "sheep", can anything they say ever really be trusted?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    ~String
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,391
    Also I don't like the idea that people with crap grammar and spelling would end up looking just as good as people who actually care about their writing. The presence of poor spelling and grammar is an important marker of posts with low thought content. And people can just use the built-in spell checker if they care about their spelling.
     
  8. Spud Emperor solanaceous common tater Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,899
    Hahaha!
    Very funny String, you've been waiting for a chance for that!
    And we may also drive on the wrong side of the road*cough*, but we sure know how to make a ewe turn!!
     
  9. Pinwheel Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,424
    Could we also have the stuff thats typed out by monkeys bashing on keyboards actually translated into english? Thanks.
     
  10. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Thats an incredibly provincial attitude. There are people here for whom English is a second, third or fourth language.


    I think, rather than harping on grammar, its important to focus on content.
     
  11. Mr MacGillivray Banned Banned

    Messages:
    527
  12. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Logic is not empirical. And this forum abounds in rational empiricists, which is why there is often a vast abyss where logic should be found. Nevertheless, some attention paid to content should be enough to satisfy both rationality and empiricism.
     
  13. Mr MacGillivray Banned Banned

    Messages:
    527
    If I were a human I wouldn't trust my senses.

    And that logical opinion is derived from extrapolation of empirical evidence. Ironically.
     
  14. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Why should it be ironic? We define the parameters of reality based on the tools available to us so its hardly surprising that we're discussing logic, grammar and spelling in a putative science forum as though any of that could stand up to the evidence available. At least not if perception is the mode of delivery.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  15. Mr MacGillivray Banned Banned

    Messages:
    527
    Mode of delivery were bits and bites traveling at light speed.
     
  16. Spud Emperor solanaceous common tater Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,899
    SAM!!!
    It's!!!!!!!!!!!!
    You forgot zee farking apostrovee.

    Qvick, spray her viz zyklon B.
     
  17. superstring01 Moderator

    Messages:
    12,110
    I agree. . . in spirit, though not in full practics. As SAM says. . .

    Not that Quad needs my defense, but I believe he was referring to those who have a native grasp of the language and still struggle with its mechanics.

    I kinda have. I think I've used that version of the joke in other forms elsewhere. I still get a chuckle when I hear it.

    ~String
     
  18. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Ah, so!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  19. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,391
    Actually it's a snobby metropolitan attitude. But anyway...

    And I haven't noticed any particular correlation between that and poor grammar. Actually I see native English speakers butchering their grammar and spelling a lot more frequently. Anyway the sorts of mistakes non-native speakers make tend to be quite distinct from those made by idiot native speakers (usually more questions of idiom and phrasing than actual grammar and spelling).

    Content becomes mysterious and eventually incomprehensible absent decent grammar. That's exactly the point of grammar. Failure to expend a bit of effort to make one's thoughts comprehensible remains a good indicator that said thought aren't worth anyone's time.
     
  20. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,391
    And there's an interesting counter-example: that sentence is grammatically correct and spelled just fine - and yet obtuse nearly to the point of vacuity.

    So, yes, by all means focus more on content.
     
    Last edited: Nov 11, 2010
  21. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,523
    I've seen something like this for international forums where someone can translate your post into another language (but your original post remains) but I've never seen a system so anal as to have dedicated spell checkers!

    If this forum could handle that level of bureaucracy (which it certainly can't without significant software upgrades) I would totally love it, I get grammar and spelling fucked up all the time, have someone just fix it for my leisure, oh how nice!

    Oh and I like sheep.
     
  22. Mr MacGillivray Banned Banned

    Messages:
    527
    I kind of have.

    Unless you mean you have a baboon.
     
  23. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    And this is why logic is not empirical - because it is subject to revision when confronted by counter-examples.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     

Share This Page