We get it. They don't.
Who are the "we," what do we "get," and who are the "they" that don't?
And there was a time on DU when we took a little pride in our grammar...if for no other reason than it is one thing we constantly make fun of here where the Freepers are concerned.
Your use of the ellipses here is confusing. A comma would have been more appropriate for the short pause required for correct sentence structure.
They can't read, write or talk and they seem to take some pride in that.
Your use of the comma here is erratic. Can some of the Freepers write, but not talk? Are all the Freepers who cannot talk also incapable of writing? A comma would have cleared that up (
"They can't read, write, or talk"). Furthermore, you have two independent clauses, joined by a conjunction, which you fail to separate with a comma. If your intent was to leave out the comma for stylistic effect, you may have been better served by dividing the clauses into two separate sentences (
"They can't read, write, or talk and they seem to take some pride in that" becomes
"They can't read, write, or talk. They seem to take some pride in that").
We try to set ourselves apart a bit. We don't want the pot calling the kettle black, y'know.
Yes, agreed. God forbid we come off like the Freepers, and appear rigid or hyper-critical. Also, thank you for speaking for all of us on DU. I, for one, appreciate your use of the royal "We."
For example: "Here ARE" some basic facts...not "here's" (here is).
It seems to me that this error may, or may not have been grammatical in its origin. The error could have begun as a simple typing or editing mistake. The original sentence may have had a singular subject, and called for a "Here is" rather than a "Here are." A change to the plurality of the subject, without going back to correct the introductory statement, would have created the same error. Since no one but the OP can tell us the answer to that question, the polite path to follow would dictate your asking the OP their intent. Instead, you assumed the OP did not know the difference between dealing with plural and singular subjects, and you chose to chastise. Normally, I would not care, but when someone takes it upon themselves to act as a Grammar Nazi, they really ought to ensure that their own command of the language is impeccable, "y'know" ?
Call me an asshole. No, really, right here in front of "everybody". Go ahead.
There is no more need to call you an asshole than there was for you to public ally call out the OP. And, by the way, your second sentence is a fragment.
But when you're alone, could you stop and think for a minute before you preach to the choir here and use bad grammar?
And I might convey a similar message to you, with a slight variation. When you're alone, would you stop for a moment, and reflect (not
could you, as I am sure of your
ability to "stop and think for a minute," but
would you, because I am unsure only of your
willingness to follow my request) before you preach FOR the choir? I mean, really! Who voted you Editor in Chief of Content? As long as the poster follows DU rules, and does not spam the forum with redundancies, I believe we should welcome the opportunity for discussion and reflection. If you already know about a bit of information, skip the thread. Don't require the OP to pre-determine what you may have already learned and what you may have not. Also, don't assume that everyone on this forum has the same base level of knowledge that you posses. DU is a big tent, and welcomes seasoned professionals and newbies alike.
And finally, should you see a poster using bad grammar, could you please consider just leaving them the fuck alone? This is an informal forum, and unless that poster was presumptuous enough to have put on the grammar nazi hat themselves, they haven't actually hurt or offended anyone.
/rant