MMOs, not MMO's



  • The apostrophe is stabbing right into my retina every time I visit the forum front page. That is all.



  • poke poke



  • Seriously, you guys. Seriously. Spreading poor grammar is evil.



  • I saw this thread awhile ago but I didn't want to be the one to bump a thread started in January. I'd otherwise have already posted and stated my support for grammar. Let's remove that apostrophe.


  • Moderator

    I agree the apostrophe does not add to understanding of the term used (MMOs) and should PROBABLY not be used. In fact, for MOST standard all-caps acronyms, the apostrophe would GENERALLY not be considered proper. It is not, however, forbidden or absolutely improper - just not preferred.
    For more: http://www.grammar-monster.com/lessons/apostrophes_show_plural_of_abbreviations.htm

    When I am dealing with lawyers and law firms, in fact, I have to take into account that they do not on average have a sound mastery of English spelling and grammar, and so I sometimes use the apostrophe just as here, because I totally get that they will understand this to mean plural, better than they will understand the addition of an "s" without apostrophe to be plural.



  • @Ayespy

    Okay, fair enough. I was not aware that it wasn't necessarily incorrect. It will still bug me when I spot it, though.



  • Spelling and grammar are over-rated. It's OK to be pedantic in a book or on a professional web site, but on blogs and forums/fora who cares? Only in those cases where the meaning is ambiguous, and could be taken either way, does it warrant asking for clarification of what was meant. When its (sic) obvious what was meant, just ignore it.

    Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht frist and lsat ltteer is at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae we do not raed ervey lteter by it slef but the wrod as a wlohe.

    On forums, misused homonyms like there for their or they're are very common because touch typists right what they here without thinking to much about the spelling.


  • Moderator

    "On forums, misused homonyms like there for their or they're are very common because touch typists right what they here without thinking to much about the spelling."

    English is Weird in this fashion. Being rooted in every prior language on the planet. all at once, it borrows homonyms from different languages, but these homonyms can have widely disparate meanings - which is why in English, uniquely among languages, spelling is not irrelevant, but rather critical. Don't give me "their, there, they're, what's the difference?" because the difference, in such a case, actually matters. And touch typists such as myself do NOT actually type just what we "here." We type what we mean.

    Just sayin'…



  • @Ayespy:

    I agree the apostrophe does not add to understanding of the term used (MMOs) and should PROBABLY not be used. In fact, for MOST standard all-caps acronyms, the apostrophe would GENERALLY not be considered proper. It is not, however, forbidden or absolutely improper - just not preferred.
    For more: http://www.grammar-monster.com/lessons/apostrophes_show_plural_of_abbreviations.htm

    When I am dealing with lawyers and law firms, in fact, I have to take into account that they do not on average have a sound mastery of English spelling and grammar, and so I sometimes use the apostrophe just as here, because I totally get that they will understand this to mean plural, better than they will understand the addition of an "s" without apostrophe to be plural.

    Mate, what you linked clearly shows that it is, in fact, incorrect. I know there are two exceptions, but "MMO" isn't one. If it was M.M.O., now that would be a different story. I've had a discussion like this many, many times.

    So you reaffirm those lawyers in their incorrectness? :)

    @Pesala:

    Spelling and grammar are over-rated. It's OK to be pedantic in a book or on a professional web site, but on blogs and forums/fora who cares? Only in those cases where the meaning is ambiguous, and could be taken either way, does it warrant asking for clarification of what was meant. When its (sic) obvious what was meant, just ignore it.

    Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht frist and lsat ltteer is at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae we do not raed ervey lteter by it slef but the wrod as a wlohe.

    On forums, misused homonyms like there for their or they're are very common because touch typists right what they here without thinking to much about the spelling.

    People like you are the reason why the language(s) is going to hell. There is a reason why those rules exist, and that's to make it as easy to understand as possible and to avoid ambiguity. Why not just ignore it altogether and make up your own spelling? Most people would understand you. Why not ignore all rules when it just works, right? Why fix an error when pointed out if we can just accept that there's an error an ignore it while it spreads? ^^

    EDIT: Oh, I see it's changed. Appreciated!


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to Vivaldi Forum was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.