Real-world examples of 'Ummm, acktually, It's X, not Y' nitpicks, and discussion about them

The Jaws wikipedia article lists these copycats:

Many films based on man-eating animals, usually aquatic, were released through the 1970s and 1980s, such as Orca, Grizzly, Mako: The Jaws of Death, Barracuda, Alligator, Day of the Animals, Tintorera, and Eaten Alive. Spielberg declared Piranha, directed by Joe Dante and written by John Sayles, “the best of the Jaws ripoffs”.[186] Among the various foreign mockbusters based on Jaws, three came from Italy: Great White,[228] which inspired a plagiarism lawsuit by Universal and was even marketed in some countries as a part of the Jaws franchise;[229] Monster Shark,[228] featured in Mystery Science Theater 3000 under the title Devil Fish;[230] and Deep Blood, which blends in a supernatural element.[231] The 1976 Brazilian film Bacalhau parodies Jaws, featuring a killer cod in place of a shark.[232][233]

All are really bad, See it is not just the shark in Jaws- it is the cast and acting- like the discussions on the boat, with Quint talking about his time in the navy with the sharks. Even Ebert liked it- (4 stars).

Other films turned it into a bloodfest with many jump scares.

I don’t know why, but Grizzly scared the crap out of ten year old me. I was visibly shaking in the theatre waiting for that bear to show up.

I remember getting into an argument at a drive-thru as to how can there be a medium drink when there are only two sizes to choose from?

Traditional or boneless?

Ummm. the US isn’t a democracy, it’s a republic. Or maybe it’s the other way around.

Nope. Kleptocratic dictatorship.

Local road law does not include the concept of “right of way”

(common hyper-correct falsity when some says ‘he had right of way’)

Actually, my local road law does include the concept of Right Of Way". A friend of mine woke one early Saturday morning to sound of a bulldozer driving down the Right Of Way at the rear of his house, pushing aside the fences, sheds, and BBQ that people had built over it.

No, that’s not the ‘right of way’ that you meant, but you were attempting a hyper-correct legal point: in ordinary English, one car has right-of-way, and the other doesn’t.

Did she? From what I read, the ruling family still did not interbreed with the ruled population?

Well, they always married relatives, so no. But she learned the local language, She Identified with Isis, presented herself as a Divine ruler, patronized the local temples, etc etc.

While the content of that blog might be true, I should point out to any readers that it is 100% free of any bibliographic references or citations. It’s the equivalent of reading a pamphlet you find on the street.

Had they notified those people first that they needed to get that stuff out of there and been ignored? or was the municipality’s first word on the subject the bulldozer?

Do you have a better cite? Do you disagree?

It was not a municipality bulldozer. It was a private bulldozer, exercising its right of way.

It is not normal to notify people, and they did not notify people. If you notify people, it gives them a chance to get a court order preventing the action.

It’s relevant to the original nitpick. The whole point about a right-of-way is that you don’t need to notify people: you have a right. This is in contrast to traffic rules, where having a (colloquial) right-of-way does not give you the right to run into other cars.

If they can get a court order preventing the action, seems to me there would have to be some legitimate reason to prevent the action. “I’m going to do this before the court can stop me” is likely to lead to a whole lot of trouble further down the road – if the court had a reason to stop you, having already committed the action isn’t going to get you off the hook.

And what if somebody had been sleeping out in one of those back yards, which appears to have been what the people who’d put up fences, sheds, and BBQ thought that area was?

But it has to be clear that it’s a right-of-way. If you let people think it’s part of their back yards for long enough for multiple people to build sheds and fences all over it, and don’t make any objection until you show up with a bulldozer, you might well find, around here at least, that the law’s on the other side of the issue.

That’s why we have lawyers: “seems to me” sometimes isn’t enough.