I have no idea. The signmaker and Bobby must both had thought it was correct. Or maybe Bobby made the sign himself.
Regarding apostrophes in plurals of acronyms, I agree that it’s a stylistic debate, but I also think that it’s probably the root of all the confusion. I therefore urge all right-thinking people to avoid them whenever possible. “Ps and qs” is perfectly comprehensible.
My local store of one of the Big Three UK supermarket chains is currently advertising “Half Price Chicken’s”. Hundreds of stickers printed and stuck to each packaged chicken, several banners in store car parks, and not a soul in the marketing department or manager’s office who could check the text before the stickers went to press.
I don’t think this is a nationwide promotion. It seems to be limited to my local store, which is fighting competition from a newly opened rival supermarket in town. Still, I expect better.
There was also a Whiskas brand snack for cats in thousands of supermarkets last year that had upon it the slogan Because cat’s like to crunch. I saw it the other day and they’ve corrected the error.
All in favor of a law requiring printers and signmakers to have qualified editors on their staffs who would be authorized to correct these and other egregious errors, even over the objections of their ignorant unwashed customers (we can call it the Straight Dopers’ Full Employment Act of 2003), please indicate by saying Aye.
Aye.
Stupidity is simply on the rise.
A few points. {Or do I mean point’s?}
+For years it has been common to see signs [sign’s] in front of houses [house’s–oh, forget it] reading “The Johnson’s” or “The Katzenbein’s” or some other such. My inlaws got a “Smith’s” sign [their real name] and didn’t notice, despite the fact that he went to Princeton, she is a Ph.D., and they are WAY too old for anyone to blame it on today’s English teachers.
+No specific cite, but I believe that confusion of it’s and its is very common in unpublished works of the nineteenth century–diaries and such. I know I have seen it, both ways, but especially it’s for its, many times in my historical research. Not sure, offhand, about using apostrophes for plurals, but there’s a VERY long history of using apostrophes in ways your English teacher might have disapproved.
+Similarly, I have a small collection of picture postcards, many of them written + sent by people I don’t know, mostly in the thirties to fifties…1930s to 1950s, for those of you who were wondering how I pluralize those. They are FULL of misspellings, peculiar grammar, and the like; your for you’re and it’s for its are only two examples of games people frequently played back then with apostrophes. (What was WITH those English teachers of the teens and twenties, anyway? Must have been the computer use…I mean, WTF were they THINKING when they let Little Miss Grandma into those chat rooms?)
+Today it is easier and easier to publish things, and easier and easier to disseminate “errors” around the world. (Thank you, Internet.)
I’d write in a conclusion of some kind, but I don’t have any idea’s for one… 
You mean like that, Monty? <D&R>
The “its/it’s” confusion, at least, I can understand (although it still grates on my nerves). Ordinarily, the apostrophe is properly used in both contractions and possessives. While it’s true that pronouns have special possessive forms, there are a lot more amateur nouns than pros, and most of the pronoun possessive forms don’t resemble the apostrophe s formation at all, so confusion isn’t possible for them (you don’t see anyone referring to “he’r chair”, for instance).
But for regular words, it just doesn’t make any sense. Why, dear God, why can’t people remember such a simple rule? This isn’t like the “I before E” rule which has so many exceptions. Apostrophied plurals are never necessary, and only allowed at all for particular nonstandard “words” like abbreviations and standalone symbols. By no means are such words so common that they should be spilling over to the rest of language.
But surely this is correct … indicating “this house belongs to the Johnsons”, etc., as opposed to “The Johnsons live here”.
Julie
No, no, no.
The Johnson’s is incorrect. The proper place to put the apostrophe is after the “s”, as in Johnsons’.
The way you have it, the house belongs to the Johnson.
Oops! You’re right of course … :o
Julie
Yes, but for a sign in front of a house, I’d prefer The Johnsons to The Johnsons’ because while the latter correctly refers to the house, which the Johnsons possess, the former refers to the people. And it is the people we, the readers, are interested in, not the house per se.
Is tonight really plural in that sentence? I would think they are referring to one (1) specific night and saying that the special belongs to “tonight”, personification of a sorts. That’s the whole purpose of adding the “to” to night, right? Just checking.
“Tonight’s” is correct. It is the possessive of “tonight.” The error is “special’s.”