# Amateur Grammar Authorities

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amateur-grammar-authorities/521117>\
**Category:** In My Humble Opinion\
**Created:** [December 13, 2009, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amateur-grammar-authorities/521117 "2009-12-13T17:49:09Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 52

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Olentzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90ced4/32.png) [@Olentzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Olentzero)\
**Post date:** [December 19, 2009, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amateur-grammar-authorities/521117/52 "2009-12-19T23:49:01Z")

</div>

Getting called on your weak, marginally supported cite puts the obligation of saying why it’s done that way on you. In short: yes, you _do_ need to say why. And pointing to the CMS, which just says “well, we’ve always done it this way” just doesn’t cut it. So far you’ve done nothing but deepen my conviction that you have no grounds to call my approach incorrect because you are unable to justify your approach beyond an appeal to tradition.

---

_[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amateur-grammar-authorities/521117)._