Is correcting someone's grammar a personal attack?

[Xanthippe1]

Should of
I said "should have"

Deleted - is that a personal attack because I can see a lot worse on here.

Teachers correct grammar all the time

There's a problem in there and it's the use of the word " sometimes". It's either yes or no. This is why people find it difficult to follow guidelines at time. All everyone wants is a CONSISTENT policy - the same for everyone.

Should it be deleted though?

I think it's over zealous by MNHQ. I have seen far worse things on here that still stand.

I think it can be done reasonably if it has an effect on the meaning of a sentence and you're seeking clarification in good faith.

How did I miss the word "sometimes"

The police pull you over. Arrest you - and then say we sometimes arrest people for this

I'm glad it's against the rules.

Imagine being poor at SPaG all your life and then every time you try to join in on chat forums, or other forms of social media, everyone takes it upon themselves to correct your typing.

It must feel horrible and very isolating.

Also, why do some people think they're so amazing that correcting the person will actually stop them making the mistake when 100s of others including teachers failed?

If you can understand what the person is saying then leave them alone about it.

If can't then the internet is not for you.

" think general corrections are fine but if it's against a Trump person it's a problem"

Corrected it for you

I've seen posters correcting spelling and grammar and being patronising about paragraphs on posters who are clearly upset. I find it horrid and belittling behaviour from someone who wants to feel superior .

No it's not - it's like telling someone they've tucked their skirt into their knickers. You're pointing something out to try to save them from future embarassment.

But should it be deleted?
Sometimes

Yes it should be deleted , I feel very sorry those posters who've been corrected . It may put them off engaging or seeking help.

But it's not against the rules

"The Spirit of the Site" and sometimes applied

And what if that person just wants to chill out and chat?

What if they don't want everything to be a SPaG learning opportunity every time they go online?

What if that happened to be the 15th time that day someone has decided they need a 'learning opportunity'?

“Courtesy” is an entirely subjective concept though, isn’t it? I think spelling and grammar matter. If one of my children were to say “should of”, I would correct them. If I was speaking with another adult and they said it, I wouldn’t dream of correcting them. I think it’s appallingly bad manners. I think it’s truly crass behaviour which demonstrates a level of ignorance which far outweighs some accidental slack grammar.

This IS an English speaking forum but everyone who posts here certainly does not have English as their first language and to suggest that the phrase “should of” is somehow less intelligible than the phrase “should have” is disingenuous at best. We all know what they mean.

MNHQ have literally told you why they delete so I'm guessing it is.

Maybe they should have RTFT before asking me a question I'd already answered

They "sometimes" delete things for not being in the spirit of the site

Define "spirit of the site"

So you did it to 'punish' them for not reading the full thread?

I can see why you were deleted then.

It is a petty remark, adding zero to a conversation.
Textinh, Mumsnet, in person or phone conversations are informal and should of is a way for the poster or speaker to add a bit of personality... the important part is what they are saying, the contebt rather than the grammar.
If it is a work email, letter, report or so, then, yes, of course, correct it.
It is rather obvious, by the way.

Yeah it’s incredibly inappropriate to correct someone’s grammar. There are many reasons people may use incorrect grammar including poor access to education as a child, learning English as a second language, dyslexia, or simply being distracted whilst typing or focusing on the content of their message rather than the grammatical structure. These people deserve to share their thoughts just as much as those who use perfect grammar.

Your post could be seen as a personal attack not in the spirit of the site

Why should I when you can ask MNHQ to define it for you?

I'm sure if you report your post you can ask them to come back to this thread.

I've seen a fair few examples where this absolutely does happen. It's usually a subject where it's something I know a bit about or have some professional/personal experience, so I enter the thread full of good intentions, and lo and behold, it's a wall of completely unpunctuated text that requires multiple scrolls to get to the bottom of.

I don't bother reading and just immediately leave the thread.

I do not accept that because mumsnet is a forum it's perfectly ok to put no effort whatsoever into how you attempt to communicate. If you walked up to someone in the street and immediately started gibbering at them at 1000 words per minute without pausing for breath, people would be desperate to get away from you. The walls of text are the same thing in written format.

Why?
Why should it have been deleted?
Define Spirit of the Site

Should it be posted in the first place?

No.

.