Why did the NFL nix the 2 Helmets for Seattle

[Gothamite]

In the NFL rule book or style guide or whatever.

I don't have a copy of that. Does that prove that the passage isn't in there?

Spoken like a true Michigan alum.

[swilson160]

because their the no fun leauge

Strike two for you.

(I'm not trying to be a jerk here. I live and die by spelling errors, so it's kind of a sticking point for me. Sorry.)

Strike one for you, Glenn. That wasn't a spelling error, it was a grammar error.

Jerk.

[Guest]

It could go either way.

...ball one?

[Gothamite]

If I were you, I'd take the spelling error. You knew which "Their/there/they're" to use, but wrote the wrong thing.

It's a far less egregious error.

[BlueSky]

Because they're HYPOCRIPE!

Swing and a miss. It's "hypocrite."

because their the no fun leauge

Strike two for you.

(I'm not trying to be a jerk here. I live and die by spelling errors, so it's kind of a sticking point for me. Sorry.)

RIP OfficeGlenn

He lived and died by spelling errors and somehow missed "leauge."

[hecticbro]

Come on, this is getting redickulus. As long as someone is coherent enough to be understood, it seems pretty pointless to jump down their throats like some bitter, underpaid high school English teacher who always dreamed of growing up to become a nobel laureate. Endlessly hammering people over their grammar or spelling ability will only discourage others from sharing their own opinions.

[powersurge]

I'll also add that I think they even used gold in the helmet, which I don't believe was ever in the original.

According to the reproductions on the Helmet Hut website plus this 1969 game-used helmet:

the Redskins did use metallic gold on the spear during its original run.

I sit corrected.

[Gothamite]

Come on, this is getting redickulus. As long as someone is coherent enough to be understood, it seems pretty pointless to jump down their throats like some bitter, underpaid high school English teacher who always dreamed of growing up to become a nobel laureate. Endlessly hammering people over their grammar or spelling ability will only discourage others from sharing their own opinions.

We're not talking about perfection. We're talking about the basics of our common language discarded not because someone has a learning disability, or lacks educational resources, or is even a poor typist, but because that person is lazy.

We all make mistakes. But I don't think that's what we're talking about here, simple mistakes. We're talking about devaluing the language because it's too much trouble to spell correctly.

So yes. When a person cannot use even vaguely correct spelling, my perception of that person's opinion is devalued. Opinions poorly expressed are, and in my opinion, ought to be, poorly received.

To put it another way, if a poster thinks so little of his own opinion as to express it in such a sloppy manner, why should I give that opinion more credence than he?

[hecticbro]

Some people aren't very talented linguists. Some people are younger. Some may not be native English speakers. Some may just be poor typists or in a rush. I don't see how any of these circumstances should automatically negate the value of a poster's opinion. After all, this isn't Chris Creamer's Grammar Ettiquette Community.

It seems to me that, here, your opinion regarding the exact pantone shade of orange used on the Browns' helmets (or some similarly mundane logo-related discussion) ought to be worth more than whether you ever learned the difference between "it's" and "its".

If you ever care to look, you'll probably find several grammatical errors every day in your morning paper. So if you really love correcting grammar, I suggest searching for typos and screw-ups in the Daily News or something and e-mailing them about it.

[powersurge]

Some people aren't very talented linguists. Some people are younger. Some may not be native English speakers. Some may just be poor typists or in a rush. I don't see how any of these circumstances should automatically negate the value of a poster's opinion. After all, this isn't Chris Creamer's Grammar Ettiquette Community.

It seems to me that, here, your opinion regarding the exact pantone shade of orange used on the Browns' helmets (or some similarly mundane logo-related discussion) ought to be worth more than whether you ever learned the difference between "it's" and "its".

If you ever care to look, you'll probably find several grammatical errors every day in your morning paper. So if you really love correcting grammar, I suggest searching for typos and screw-ups in the Daily News or something and e-mailing them about it.

don't waste your breath.

some people are just so 'above' everyone that it doesn't make sense to bother.

My opinion: Read WHAT is actually written and not HOW it is written. Judging spelling and language on this board is analogous to judging someone by how they are dressed. Some people think just because someone is in a business suit they are more intelligent than someone in a ripped t-shirt and jeans. Just becasue someone has a thesaurus and or dictionary embedded in their skull doesn't make their point any more valid or articulate than the next guy. I'm frankly getting a little sick of some of this elitist behavior on this site. Some people need to get off of their high horses and get real.

[BlueSky]

My opinion: Read WHAT is actually written and not HOW it is written.

Agree if we're talking about discussion boards. I couldn't resisting tweaking OfficeGlenn about how he chided the poster for his spelling but somehow missed that "league" wasn't spelled correctly. In the real world though, writing skills matter.

Judging spelling and language on this board is analogous to judging someone by how they are dressed. Some people think just because someone is in a business suit they are more intelligent than someone in a ripped t-shirt and jeans.

It's an unpleasant fact that perception is sometimes reality. Intelligence aside, depending on the situation (job interview or if they're my brain surgeon for instance), I might conclude the well-dressed person has far better judgment.

Just becasue someone has a thesaurus and or dictionary embedded in their skull doesn't make their point any more valid or articulate than the next guy.

Perhaps not, but like it or not, you'll get farther with decent writing skills then without. Again, it's a matter of perception, and if your paper has errors and the other person's doesn't, chances are they have the advantage. Today, you don't need those references embedded in your skull, you can easily access them at sites like encarta.com, so no excuse there.

Personally, it's not the errors that irritate me, it's people who will spend 6 hours a day trying to make the next level in WOW but make no effort at all to improve truly relevant skills.