Yeah, we all know the correct word is “disregardless.”
My own hobby horse: “comprised of.” These two words never, ever go together.
Correct: The symphony comprises four movements.
Correct: The symphony consists of four movements.
Wrong: The symphony is comprised of four movements.
These are all mute points.
Are you sure about the “the symphony comprises four movements” part? I had thought that “X comprise(s) Y” denoted element(s) X forming the entirety of set
Y. So, “the four movements comprise the symphony”. I grant that the discrepancy could be merely connotational; your example could be technically accurate while sounding wrong. But if this is the case, it doesn’t make it sound any less odd…seems kinda like saying “the bag is one hundred M&Ms” instead of “there are 100 M&Ms in the bag”.
Am I off base here, or does that example seem backwards to anyone else?
Note: I’m actually a closet descriptivist, but why derail a perfectly good discussion of a system just because I don’t believe the system is valid? Debating rules is fun.
Here’s my pet peeve: “The orchestra reached a crescendo.” That’s like saying, “My car reached an accelerate.”
As much as I enjoyed that, I must protest. It is quite common for an orchestra to play music to the score, and eventually reach the passage that is marked with the elongated “< sign” that is known as a “crescendo.” When they do, it is cusomtary for the musicians to continue playing to the score, but louder than before.
Ha, ha. I’ve heard it used in another way, though. Many people confuse the word crescendo with climax. What you’re talking about is playing to the crescendo marking, which a person might, in casual speech, refer to as simply “the crescendo” (i.e. “the crescendo is in bar seven”), but that’s not what I’m talking about.
“I’m an American, aren’t I?”
“Yes, and I are too.”
When did “task” become a verb?
The strict meaning has, indeed, shifted somewhat, so my hobby horse is getting increasingly lame. From here:
So, the traditional rule would only allow “the symphony comprises four movements,” wherease the newer usage that’s appearing would also allow “the symphony is comprised of four movements” or “four movements comprise the symphony.” By substituting “consist of” for “comprise” in that first “new usage” example, we get “the symphony is consisted of of four movements.” Doing the same to the second, we get “four movements consist of the symphony.” Not pretty.
Given the slipperiness of the definition, it’s probably best to avoid “comprise” completely!
Deduce, you say!
When Merriam-Webster first defined it as a transitive verb (“to assign a task to”). 
What other way is there to say that while still avoiding both the stilted “am I not?” and the slang “ain’t I?”
I did not see that definition in the link provided, but I did see it defined as a transitive verb, however, so hush my mouth on that score. Your construction still sounds a little clunky to me; I suspect it is because you have “task” as an intransitive verb. A transitive verb requires a direct object.
Yeah, I couldn’t get a link to the transitive verb’s definition (I could only access it from the noun’s definition), but I figured you’d figure it out. 
Oh, I’m not really trying to defend myself: you’re absolutely right that I shouldn’t have used “tasked” in that way. Bad, bad tech writer. But it doesn’t make “task” less of a verb, just an abused one. 