Clairvoyance/ Second Sight/ Psychics/ Spiritualism

[crofter]

Just for gramatical clarification. The title of the thread is Clairvoyance/ Second Sight/ Psychics/ Spiritualism

 

but should it not be Clairvoyance,Second Sight,Physics,Spiritualism,The Third Eye?

[Marooned in Maywick]

^^^

 

I'd've thought Physics would be more appropriate in the Science and Technology sub-forum.

[zebbidy]

why dont physics win the lottery every week?

[Redz4493]

Others are a bit pirnickity!

I presume you include me.

 

Frankly I really do not understand why people get so wound up when things they say are clarified, or errors are highlighted. The stock response on Shetlink in such situations is almost invariably hostile, with excuses, justifications and "pot/kettle" comments thrown back. I have long felt that whenever someone takes the effort to correct my mistakes, it is for my benefit. I am accordingly grateful for the information. Surely it is a good thing to want to improve? Due to the general hysteria which often erupts when spelling or grammatical matters are noted, I have given up responding to those. I do, however, feel that there are some situations which, if clarified, help to minimise confusion in debates. This case was, I believe, in that category.

 

In summary, I think it is good to clarify communication, and such clarification is not necessarily pedantic. Maybe we could have a checkbox in the Shetlink profile to indicate users who welcome corrections? I certainly would tick it, especially to receive tips on punctuation.

 

I certainly don't mind being corrected when its relevant to the argument. Perhaps I made a minor grammatical error, but I don't think it really affected the point I was trying to make (i.e. to be more tolerant and open minded..blah blah blah). Thank you though for making it clearer for me. I'll make sure I have my dictionary with me next time