1596Views41Replies

Author Options:

"member's" should be "members'" in Grammar Police description Answered

Please edit the Grammar Police profile accordingly. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Ah, irony.

Discussions

A few days ago, you wrote "PWNED." I looked up the term in Wikipedia, but must confess my ignorance. Are you using the term from "Leetspeak" to mock our dear M. Bumpus, or myself? Yes, I know the question itself only makes my situation worse, but what exactly have I got to lose, other than the respect of my peers?

Okay; thanks! I'm woefully unfamiliar with the jargon and abbreviations that have evolved from BBS's, online gaming, and text-messaging. I can do basic smileys and Usenet acronyms, but that's about it. Now, start discussing penguin diagrams, ISR/FSR, and popping q-qbar pairs out of the vacuum and I'm right at home! :-)

. Can we expect an iBle for the DIY q-qbar popper? I have two Thermos bottles and some room in the spare bedroom.
.
. Is there an online [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Complete_Idiot%27s_Guide_to... Complete Idiot's Guide To ...] for all that?
. All I know about particle physics (is that even the proper term?) is what little I've picked up from Smithsonian and IEEE's Spectrum magazines. Ie, not a lot.

Heh! quark-pair popping happens all by itself, and it's why you can't make isolated quarks -- as the separation between two quarks increases, the energy density in the field binding them together increases (instead of decreasing as it does for EM or gravity). Eventually the energy density exceeds the mass of a quark pair, and you end up with two bound systems (i.e., two hadrons) instead of two separated quarks.

Amazon has a pretty good search result.

"Particle physics" is the common term. Within the field, we prefer "high energy physics" for the stuff I do, with big accelerators and particle beams at the multiple GeV level or higher. "Medium energy physics" refers typically to single-beam (fixed target) experiments with beams at the few GeV level or below. "Nuclear physics" covers studying the collective behaviour of nuclei, rather than the constituent protons and neutrons; where accelerators are used, they are really low energy (few to hundreds of MeV).

Scientific American has had a number of very good articles. If you look up "Particle Accelerators" in Wikipedia, the cross-references will lead you in several good directions. Also, if you read the Economist, their coverage of physics is the best I have ever seen from regular journalistic sources.

No big, as you've said yourself communicating in text can get challenging at times...

. I gave up trying to understand 'leet a long time ago. I can understand a little lolcat-speak, but not much. Interesting Yoda-speak is, but it makes my head hurt to read it. . Damn kids nowadays

Is there any way of handing ownership of the group from Bumpus to kelseymh?

Chuckles

Oh, no! A bleedin' Yank shouldn't be appointed to the Queen's English's Household Guard. Surely you're a better candidate for the role of Usurper of Bumpus than I?

0
None
bumpus

9 years ago

Done. :D

Oh, noooo! Google "Mr. Bill" if you're too young...

Not just "members", but "members" with an apostrophe at the end. In your description you originally wrote "other member's [sic] misspellings." The possessive was correct, but not the number. You're referring to "misspellings by (belonging to) other members," that is, "other members' misspellings."

(And for the humor-impaired...as NachoMahma wrote elsehwere, this sort of "nit picking" is really only funny, or even acceptable, when the target is clearly capable of not making the mistakes being noted. Otherwise, it's just mean-spirited. As the Group's creator Bumpus clearly fallis into that category.)

THE WHOLE POINT of the grammar police is to correct other people. You have to practice what you preach. If you want to criticize people, better make sure you are flawless yourself on the subject. Or are you saying that the Grammar Police are incapable of using proper grammar, as per your last paragraph? In that case, my humblest apologies. Though I do wonder why y'all are correcting other members' grammar then.

By the way...I'm surprised you haven't jumped all over the mistakes I made in my previous response to this comment of yours (beginning "THE WHOLE POINT..."). It would be just the thing to do, under the circumstances, heh heh. Cheers!

Well, since I misinterpreted your original comment completely, it hardly seemed fair...

Mmmm....the infinite perils of attempting to communicate socially via a non-social medium. Okay, let me try to spell it out. I don't think you followed the link I included (and am including here as well).

The original intent of the "Grammar Police" Group was obviously satirical, implying a cohesive community for people who apparently get enjoyment from picking on errors made by people who may not real, usually by way of excessively harsh language. More especially, implying a "community" of people who apparently get enjoyment out of criticizing errors made by others for whom English is not their first (or even second!) language.

Those of us engaging in this discussion have sufficient skill with English that we could easily engage in that sort of mean-spirited attack. NachoMahma's posting was a kind reminder that we should strive to rise above that. If someone makes spelling or grammatical mistakes who clearly isn't familiar enough with the language to realize it, we should either let it go, or at worst mention it to them privately.

On the other hand, attacking each other -- the self-appointment members of the Grammar Police -- is perfectly well in bounds, since we ourselves are all supposedly The Best Of The Best, and if we make mistakes, well then, on our own heads be it.

Oh, wait, I completely misread your first comment-I thought you were defending the Police, and saying it was wrong to point out their errors. Which I thought was strange, given that you made this topic. I was trying to make the same point as you are now! LOL.

Sorry. My bad.

I will say, though, that I did not read the original intent of the group as satirical. There is nothing to indicate that on the description or the topic calling to go through every single instructable. I do know that several members appear to have taken it quite seriously and literally, one reason I've been so dead set against it.

I completely agree-I hate the nitpicking. Hate it. There's just no reason to be like that.

. I suppose bumpus could take it as a compliment. If kelseymh, didn't think bumpus had reasonable writing skills and just made a silly mistake, he wouldn't have posted his comments in a public forum. Ie, all in good fun. . Similar to someone accusing the pot of calling the kettle black. ;) . . bumpus' setting himself up as the Grammar Dictator didn't help. That's just asking for trouble! Unless one is perfect. :)

You wrote, "I suppose bumpus could take it as a compliment." I'm pretty sure he did, given the ":D" at the end of his original reply. I'm also pretty sure he got the humor as well, without needing an explanatory essay. Sigh...

. "elsehwere" <snicker>
. "The crux of the biscuit is the apostrophe" - Frank Zappa/Stink Foot

Heh, heh. Thanks for playing! I saw my misspelling after I posted, but it seemed ever so appropriate to leave myself open :-) BTW, I'll be posting a question to your FAQ about the "sic" in my comment above.

. You can't use square brackets in posts. Brackets are used to indicate links. Notice that the link behind "sic" is /sic. . I know of no workaround. :(

never say can't unless it is totally impossible, like, like flying or a flame less candle or something ;-)

Hey, I've flown before! In a sweet new invention. It's called an airplane.

Yeah, I was being a little sarcastic ;-) a flameless candle is called a light bulb *chuckle*

It is just at one time people claimed it would be impossible to fly, etc. I dislike the word impossible so I tend to "find a way" many times when I hear it :-) Part of my stubborn streak I guess :-)

. How did you do that?! Do tell and I'll add it to the text formatting FAQ.

Some of the extended ascii codes come through ok, many don't, but that one does, so does ® ;-) You type an andpersand, and number sign, the number code (in this case 91 for the left bracket or 93 for the right, then type an semicolon [ ;-) ]

Excellent link; hopefully NM will add it to the FAQ as well. And thanks for the tip! However...if you don't have the basic ASCII character set memorized, you don't really deserve to know how to ue the numerical codes, now do you?

. Good idea. I added a link to an ASCII chart.

I just learned something from that list: " ¬ " means "NOT" I'd ~~always~~ occasionally wondered...

Well, some of the non-basic ones can be used too, like the brackets for instance and the REG ™ symbol ;-)

. Thanks! I'll definitely add that to the FAQ.

Grammar Police, ive got my eye on you. Dont you go causin trouble. Im a grammar outlaw, and i will take you down.... /end ultimatum

And in keeping with the theme of the Grammar Police Group...so few of Ms. Morrisette's examples are really ironic. Unfortunate, annoying, hilarious to onlookers, but not actually ironic. Sigh...