# People who’s weblogs suck. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [December 4, 2003, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-who-s-weblogs-suck/216861 "2003-12-04T03:35:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2003, 5:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-who-s-weblogs-suck/216861/21 "2003-12-04T05:34:47Z")
gah. Read a parenthesis after _who_. ---
**Author:** ![That\_Insufferable\_Jerk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/13edae/32.png) [@That\_Insufferable\_Jerk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/That_Insufferable_Jerk)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2003, 5:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-who-s-weblogs-suck/216861/22 "2003-12-04T05:35:14Z")
accord to [m-w.com](http://m-w.com) there is no such distinction. ---
**Author:** ![That\_Insufferable\_Jerk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/13edae/32.png) [@That\_Insufferable\_Jerk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/That_Insufferable_Jerk)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2003, 5:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-who-s-weblogs-suck/216861/23 "2003-12-04T05:37:04Z")
same thing with webster’s new universal unabridged dictionary. ---
**Author:** ![That\_Insufferable\_Jerk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/13edae/32.png) [@That\_Insufferable\_Jerk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/That_Insufferable_Jerk)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2003, 5:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-who-s-weblogs-suck/216861/24 "2003-12-04T05:38:56Z")
but for the sake of all who think there right I’ll admit that it is a very rare use of it. ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2003, 5:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-who-s-weblogs-suck/216861/25 "2003-12-04T05:39:55Z")
> [@](#): > > accord to [m-w.com](http://m-w.com) there is no such distinction. Bullshit. Put up or shut up. ---
**Author:** ![Soul\_Brother\_Number\_Two](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/soul_brother_number_two/32/3515_2.png) [@Soul\_Brother\_Number\_Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Soul_Brother_Number_Two)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2003, 5:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-who-s-weblogs-suck/216861/26 "2003-12-04T05:41:13Z")
Idiot boy, not only do you punctuate incorrectly, you also can’t read. > **[Definition of who | Dictionary.com](https://www.dictionary.com/browse/who)** > > Definition of who from Dictionary.com, the world’s leading online source for English definitions, pronunciations, word origins, idioms, Word of the Day, and more. ---
**Author:** ![That\_Insufferable\_Jerk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/13edae/32.png) [@That\_Insufferable\_Jerk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/That_Insufferable_Jerk)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2003, 5:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-who-s-weblogs-suck/216861/27 "2003-12-04T05:41:45Z")
hmm… what’s wrong with my last post? ---
**Author:** ![That\_Insufferable\_Jerk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/13edae/32.png) [@That\_Insufferable\_Jerk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/That_Insufferable_Jerk)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2003, 5:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-who-s-weblogs-suck/216861/28 "2003-12-04T05:43:10Z")
Once again I cited m-w and Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary. ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2003, 5:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-who-s-weblogs-suck/216861/29 "2003-12-04T05:50:20Z")
So let’s have a link or a quotation. ---
**Author:** ![That\_Insufferable\_Jerk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/13edae/32.png) [@That\_Insufferable\_Jerk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/That_Insufferable_Jerk)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2003, 5:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-who-s-weblogs-suck/216861/30 "2003-12-04T05:58:02Z")
> **[Dictionary by Merriam-Webster: America's most-trusted online dictionary](https://www.merriam-webster.com/)** > > The dictionary by Merriam-Webster is America's most trusted online dictionary for English word definitions, meanings, and pronunciation. #wordsmatter Main Entry: who  Pronunciation: 'hü, ü Function: pronoun Etymology: Middle English, from Old English hwA; akin to Old High German hwer, interrogative pronoun, who, Latin quis, Greek tis, Latin qui, relative pronoun, who Date: before 12th century 1 : what or which person or persons – used as an interrogative \ \ – used by speakers on all educational levels and by many reputable writers, though disapproved by some grammarians, as the object of a verb or a following preposition \ \ 2 : the person or persons that : WHOEVER 3 – used as a function word to introduce a relative clause; used especially in reference to persons \ but also in reference to groups \ or to animals \ or to inanimate objects especially with the implication that the reference is really to a person \ – used by speakers on all educational levels and by many reputable writers, though disapproved by some grammarians, as the object of a verb or a following preposition \ The Webster new universal unabridged dictionary will be here in the next 10 minutes. ---
**Author:** ![eli\_the\_fanatic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ccd318/32.png) [@eli\_the\_fanatic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eli_the_fanatic)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2003, 5:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-who-s-weblogs-suck/216861/31 "2003-12-04T05:59:17Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by That Insufferable Jerk… \* > \*\*Once again I cited m-w and Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary. \*\* Your cite proves that you are wrong, jerk (well, that’s your name). See that part where it says “Words commonly confused”? It means what we’re about to see is two DIFFERENT words that are COMMONLY CONFUSED. Now, I hope at this point you understand that what follows are not synonyms, but two different words that mean different things that might be mixed up by someone sometimes. These are not INTERCHANGEABLE because they are commonly confused. They are COMMONLY MISUSED because they are commonly confused. Your cite goes onto explain: WHO’S is a contraction meaning WHO IS. WHOSE is a possessive. Hence, every single time you see WHO’S you can substitute WHO IS. Your thread title is PEOPLE WHO IS WEBLOGS SUCK. ---
**Author:** ![That\_Insufferable\_Jerk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/13edae/32.png) [@That\_Insufferable\_Jerk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/That_Insufferable_Jerk)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2003, 6:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-who-s-weblogs-suck/216861/32 "2003-12-04T06:06:53Z")
No, That’s phrase specific usage of the contraction in slang. No a guide to using the word. ---
**Author:** ![eli\_the\_fanatic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ccd318/32.png) [@eli\_the\_fanatic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eli_the_fanatic)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2003, 6:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-who-s-weblogs-suck/216861/33 "2003-12-04T06:12:20Z")
Who’s is a contraction of who is or who has. That’s all it is. There is no “phrase specific usage of the contraction in slang” where it means anything else. You made a fucking typo. For chrissakes, we all do it. Just be a man about it instead of citing the dictionary (which proves you are wrong) and then pretend it really says something else. ---
**Author:** ![jackelope](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/a6a055/32.png) [@jackelope](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jackelope)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2003, 6:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-who-s-weblogs-suck/216861/34 "2003-12-04T06:12:55Z")
I think I see a trend in **That Insufferable Jerk…**'s posts here. In addition to the trend of being wrong, that is. ---
**Author:** ![Soul\_Brother\_Number\_Two](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/soul_brother_number_two/32/3515_2.png) [@Soul\_Brother\_Number\_Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Soul_Brother_Number_Two)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2003, 6:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-who-s-weblogs-suck/216861/35 "2003-12-04T06:14:41Z")
Jerk, and I feel like I can call you that, could you do a favor for li’l ol’ me and show us the part of that m-w entry that proves your point? Because I ain’t seeing it. It must be me, though, because you couldn’t possibly be as thick as you seem. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2003, 6:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-who-s-weblogs-suck/216861/36 "2003-12-04T06:14:51Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by That Insufferable Jerk… \* > \*\*but for the sake of all who think there right I’ll admit that it is a very rare use of it. \*\* First of all you mean "…all who think **they’re** right, not “there [sic] right.” “They’re” is a contraction of “they are.” “There” is a preposition. And just to be thorough, “their” is a third person, plural possessive. Secondly (just so you know) **Eli** has a Masters Degree in English. He knows what he’s talking about while you clearly don’t. ---
**Author:** ![eli\_the\_fanatic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ccd318/32.png) [@eli\_the\_fanatic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eli_the_fanatic)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2003, 6:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-who-s-weblogs-suck/216861/37 "2003-12-04T06:18:31Z")
Ah, it was Matt’s cite that had the usage I quoted. Your cite doesn’t have anything at all on “who’s”, or “whose,” only a definition of “who.” ---
**Author:** ![eli\_the\_fanatic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ccd318/32.png) [@eli\_the\_fanatic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eli_the_fanatic)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2003, 6:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-who-s-weblogs-suck/216861/38 "2003-12-04T06:20:58Z")
Insufferable Troll would be a better name for this guy. ---
**Author:** ![That\_Insufferable\_Jerk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/13edae/32.png) [@That\_Insufferable\_Jerk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/That_Insufferable_Jerk)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2003, 6:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-who-s-weblogs-suck/216861/39 "2003-12-04T06:28:17Z")
It is a phrase specific usage of it in slang, and it was a typo, but when I looked it up in the dictionary I realized that there is no reference to the correct usage of the possessive “’ ’s “ with who. Amazingly none of you can prove me wrong because it isn’t wrong. It surprised me to, but you can’t. And for the there/ they’re reference if you read the posts you would realize that it is a joke. \ usage see WHOM, THAT - as who archaic : as one that : as if someone - as who should say archaic : so to speak - who is who or who’s who or who was who : the identity of or the noteworthy facts about each of a number of persons Bottom of Form 0 As you can see it’s referring to a specific usage of the contraction in a phrase of slang. ---
**Author:** ![MysteryFellow63427](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a88e4f/32.png) [@MysteryFellow63427](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MysteryFellow63427)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2003, 6:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-who-s-weblogs-suck/216861/40 "2003-12-04T06:50:31Z")
The first few sentences were quite amusing, but the humor rapidly tailed off. Points lost for repeatedly failing to spell “you’re” correctly. Overall score: 2.7 on the ice skating scale. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-who-s-weblogs-suck/216861.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-who-s-weblogs-suck/216861.md?page=3)