Wouldn’t it also introduce Godwin’s Law into every thread?
This sounds like a weird sort of Pit thread. As in, “I hate all these people correcting my grammar/spelling, so I’ll make a really big deal of it and ask for a grammar Nazi! PWNED!”
People can be snarky enough around here. Why would I want someone specific correcting me? And what the heck would it do, as I can’t go back and correct? If anything stands out enough to annoy someone in one of my posts, they are free to comment on it.
I realize that this is on a tangent to the OP, but could we get a posture nazi while we are at it? People are exhibiting abysmal posture of late.
It had to happen. Thank you.
I guess so. I was hoping that people would take no offense because it was official, but it was just an idea.
I still wouldn’t mind Oberstgruppenführer Gaudere. Maybe he could be a common enemy to unite the board.
The savages.
I’m not so sure we’d be allowed to do something like this here. Didn’t Shrubya DoubleU Bush declare a War on Grammar?
I like this idea – sort of. But instead of official Grammar Police, I favor a system by which posters are gradually licensed in the following areas: forum participation, invective, humor, competence (expertise acclaimed but not required) in subject matter, use of big words and formation of complex sentences. You’d need an extra practice forum with links to recommended reading within and outside the SDMB, so people could earn the right to participate more and more fully on the board. New members could start out, for example, in the Pit (“MUH! UGH! NO! F###! BAAD!!!”), go on to, say, IMHO (“Hey, guys, I really loooove grapes, you know?”), then MPSIMS (“OP: Hey, lookit what came out of my Giant Cyst!”), and progress at their own pace through the other forums as they acquire the necessary tools and credentials (no hierarchy of forums is implied here: some posters might arrive perfectly qualified for GQ or GD and be hopeless at the other forums). You’d get little electronic merit badges next to your user name as you earned the right to post in various ways on assorted topics. Violations would look like this:
The King of Soup: Frankly, the anarcho-syndicalist model represents the best non-governmental hope of reducing nuclear proliferation solely because nukes are worth money and the ASM represents the only efficient system, absent a central authority, of concentrating capital enough to buy them, which –
Moderator: Pull over, there, Tex. You’re whippin’ up a big froth o’ political theory, speculative economics and nuclear proliferation. You gotta license to spout off in any of those fields?
The King of Soup: Um, I have the OP’s permission … and I’m agreeing with what SmartPosterX said a couple of months ago in another thread.
Moderator: Ain’t good enough, I’m afraid. Back to the practice forum with you, and don’t come back until you’ve read at least some Schell, Kennan, and Proudhon.
The King of Soup: But …
Moderator I said Git! You’re lucky your grammar ‘n’ spelling checked out okay or you’d be spendin’ next week in the Remedial Forum.
The King of Soup: Oh, all right (grumble).
That’s a good point. Grammar Nazi could be given editing privilege, and wouldn’t even have to make [del]their[/del] his/her own post calling attention to your error. All anyone would see is the little “Last edited by” tag.
Last edited by Grammar Nazi : 08-17-2005 at 5:08 PM. Reason: fixed the grammar of another clueless poster.
Those who can, write. Those who can’t, edit.
Except that the singular “their” is absolutely correct, no matter what a bunch of prescriptivists with the bizarre idea that English is a Latin cognate will tell you.
Hi there.
Much as I dislike the idea you came up with (mainly because who’s gonna do it? i don’t want to pay more to hire someone!), I think this is hilarious:
I have to agree with you there. English simply offers no suitable solution to a genderless third person, other than “it” and its Silence of the Lambs eerieness. The only sensible solution is to invent a numberless usage for the already genderless “they”. It sounds a bit weird at first, but the brain can acclimate.
Interestingly, one consequence of the genderless construction is that it conveys the so-called “gay porn problem” to the whole of third person writing. Right now, we can speak of Mary and John by saying, “She placed her hand on his thigh.” There is no ambiguity about who placed what where. But in the case of David and John, we have, “He placed his hand on his thigh.” Did David place David’s hand on David’s thigh? Did David place John’s hand on David’s thigh? John’s hand on John’s thigh? David’s hand on John’s thigh? Or did John place John’s hand on John’s thigh? Or David’s hand on John’s thigh? And so on.
Right on, bro! It’s a real bugger doing Internet searches for lesbo stories.
Grmmar nad spllellnig si tno imorptnat, hte midn cna rpadily dceode wrods adn prhases ot asess tehir mneannig rgardles. Its waht yuo sya taht meattrs, not hwo yuo sepll it.
Well, the title is Grammar Nazi. If you want to give it to a descriptivist, perhaps the title should be Grammar Hippee instead. 
Great idea. In addition, they should hire a coding coach from the VBulletin software development department.
At the risk of bring one of my pet peeves into ATMB and incurring the wrath of TubaDiva, good descriptive grammar addresses the idea that there are standards used in “correct English” that are distinct from the forms used in colloquial intercourse. “Proper English” is one of several subsets of accurately described English usage; netspeak of the “C U l8r” style is another; the dialogue at Joe’s Bar and Grill is another; “Write up a SDF on the Johnson contract, and put it through the NFP” is yet another.
Besides, what is a Hippee? Is it the recipient of the action committed by a Hipper such as the late German Admiral?
Thanks. If they’re taking applications, I’m hoping to be the Humor Nazi or the Paradox Nazi.
Well, then we’ll need a Satire/parody Nazi, too.
We could call himher the Grazi[grat-zee].