It's not spelling, it's using the wrong word to mean something else entirely.
But everyone knew exactly what the intended meaning was. And the guidelines tell us not to bang on about it in an unconstructive way.
A quick funny quip is ok probably, but all this unconstructive "I had no idea what the sentence meant" stuff isn't really true and doesn't help the thread or the OP.
Without having a go at the OP, the spelling shows a total lack of basic English. Typing "their" instead of "they're" is certainly not a case of hitting the wrong key.
Does it matter? They know what they meant, you know what they meant, I know what they meant. Just go 'tsk' to yourself over the declining standards in this country and move on. This is not the place for an English lesson.
It's not spelling, it's using the wrong word to mean something else entirely.
Of course it's spelling, it's pretty obvious that they meant "they're". And my point still stands, it's against T&Cs to make an issue out of spelling and grammar when it's clear what they meant in the first place.
But on here it only takes one person to make a comment for others to join the bandwagon and try to out-funny each other. :rolleyes:
And moving away from the rules, I think it's pretty damn rude anyway to enter a thread and have your response be poking fun at a spelling / grammar error in the title and completely ignore the topic.
Actually it implies that posts correcting spelling are uncontructive not the contents!
It really doesn't imply that at all. It implies that unconstructive posts correcting spelling are a subset all such posts. Replace unconstructive with any other adjective that fits (e.g long, abusive, capitalised, boring) and you'll see what I mean.
Silurians look great I think. I saw the mock up done of an alternative design much closer to the original shape. and that would have been good too.
Ooh, do you have a link?
And I totally agree about the Zygons.
Looking forward to seeing the Ice Warriors. They were a great monster to pretend to be in the playground. You just had to make the hands and walk slowly rocking from side to side.
Looking forward to seeing the Ice Warriors. They were a great monster to pretend to be in the playground. You just had to make the hands and walk slowly rocking from side to side.
Original New Series Design: http://angriest.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/alternative-silurian.html
I just hope the Ice Warriors have lost their awful hisssssssing voices. The Ice Lords were fine but the generic Warrior were unbearable in my opinion to listen to, not as bad as the torturess Sea Devils, but still unbearable.
Looking forward to seeing the Ice Warriors. They were a great monster to pretend to be in the playground. You just had to make the hands and walk slowly rocking from side to side.
See post above (thanks). It was a terrific looking mask.
Many Doctor Who fans excel at slowly rocking side to side.
I can't see them reproducing the original voices. They really are a bit of an ordeal on the ears.
See post above (thanks). It was a terrific looking mask.
Many Doctor Who fans excel at slowly rocking side to side.
I can't see them reproducing the original voices. They really are a bit of an ordeal on the ears.
But the voice was the thing that really scared me! It wouldn't be the same for me without that slow deliberate hissing...That is where the menace came from.
I have to come clean and say I've never watched an Ice Warriors episode, or even watched clips. So I'll be going into this without preconceptions, which is nice.
But the voice was the thing that really scared me! It wouldn't be the same for me without that slow deliberate hissing...That is where the menace came from.
True. There must be a way of reproducing that scary thing without actually hurting your ears!
I have to come clean and say I've never watched an Ice Warriors episode, or even watched clips. So I'll be going into this without preconceptions, which is nice.
Or get yourself Seeds of Death and get your conceptions all pre'd up.
I saw the Bernard Bresslaw Ice Warrior costume at the Experience exhibition. Terrific - huge and towering. They put it next to the Zygon, opposite the Sontarans and near the (giant) Robot. I was in heaven.
Or get yourself Seeds of Death and get your conceptions all pre'd up.
I'm torn - I liked the new Sontarans, but the changes made for the new Silurians took some getting used to. Maybe I'll wait for some shooting pictures/reports and see how much they diverge from their earlier incarnation - if it looks like they'll be pretty close, I might catch the original episodes.
Edit: as a footnote, although I've not watched the episodes, I know the basic plotlines for the stories - and I think that a species that starts out antagonistic but then becomes peaceful good guys over time - albeit with the implication that they could still become a threat - is absolutely perfect for the current era of Who. The one thing Moffat's been good at is giving the various species more depth than just being evil nasties. As well as saving money by re-using masks and costumes, the races in modern Who have much more moral relativism, individuality and varied goals.
ALthjough I like most of what Moffat does, I do think he has ruined the Daleks with the power ranger colours and the Silurians. I hope he gets the Ice Warriors right and it won't be some bloke with an ice cream cone on his head that hisses.
Good Lord, I see the Grammar Police are doing overtime today:rolleyes:
Hello, did somebody call?
After a long wrangle on the GD forum the other day, in which I acknowledged myself to be a grammar snob, I actually used "there" instead of "their" in another thread. Luckily, no one seemed to notice, but I was mortified. It was too late to edit by the time I realised.
Without having a go at the OP, the spelling shows a total lack of basic English. Typing "their" instead of "they're" is certainly not a case of hitting the wrong key.
Not necessarily true. my phone puts you're instead of your as an autocorrect and I'm often sending a quick message so don't see it. same with their and there and they're sometimes it thinks I mean the other...
After a long wrangle on the GD forum the other day, in which I acknowledged myself to be a grammar snob, I actually used "there" instead of "their" in another thread. Luckily, no one seemed to notice, but I was mortified. It was too late to edit by the time I realised.
So even purists like me make mistakes.
"purity" and "Granny McSmith" - not concepts often covered by a single post.
I'm not a big fan of the new look Silurians as I think their faces look too human (the ones in SO3008s link look great btw). At least with the 1970s costumes and masks they were so obviously fake that they didn't look human at all. I hope the Ice Warriors don't get the same treatment and that they end up looking pretty much as they did 40 odd years ago.
I have to admit, it grates on me too. I have to restrain myself sometimes from correcting bad grammar and spelling.
I keeping thinking it's like having BO - everyone else knows, but if no-one ever tells you, how are you ever going to fix it? If I spot an error in my own posts quickly enough, I have to go back and correct it.
I think it's pretty damn rude anyway to enter a thread and have your response be poking fun at a spelling / grammar error in the title and completely ignore the topic.
In the same vain, I think it's pretty poor to be getting there/their/they're wrong. It's something you can learn in five minutes and is really very basic English.
That said, coming from another era (sans mobile technology) it's very possible that these mistakes are coming from autocorrect. Which is a bit scary.
In the same vain, I think it's pretty poor to be getting there/their/they're wrong. It's something you can learn in five minutes and is really very basic English.
That said, coming from another era (sans mobile technology) it's very possible that these mistakes are coming from autocorrect. Which is a bit scary.
But your feelings on the matter are neither here nor there. On this forum you should avoid unconstructive posts on these matters (for example, saying that someone's posting quality is "poor"). The thread isn't about grammar or spelling so repeated posts bleating on and on about it are against the rules.
edit: I don't mean that to be harsh - correct spelling is useful etc. But extended discussion of it here isn't the place.
I keeping thinking it's like having BO - everyone else knows, but if no-one ever tells you, how are you ever going to fix it? If I spot an error in my own posts quickly enough, I have to go back and correct it.
If a co-worker has BO and you think they should know about it, do you do it by announcing it loudly to all your colleagues at once in the middle of a conversation about something else?
If a co-worker has BO and you think they should know about it, do you do it by announcing it loudly to all your colleagues at once in the middle of a conversation about something else?
Awkward...
Well, I guess the the more modern costumes take actor comfort into account, but I hope they do retain a more traditional look, rather than go for, say, a Waters of Mars like skin cracking effect. I reckon, though, that Bernard Breslaw's costume must have stunk to high heaven at the end of the day.
Comments
But everyone knew exactly what the intended meaning was. And the guidelines tell us not to bang on about it in an unconstructive way.
A quick funny quip is ok probably, but all this unconstructive "I had no idea what the sentence meant" stuff isn't really true and doesn't help the thread or the OP.
Does it matter? They know what they meant, you know what they meant, I know what they meant. Just go 'tsk' to yourself over the declining standards in this country and move on. This is not the place for an English lesson.
Nope!
Of course it's spelling, it's pretty obvious that they meant "they're". And my point still stands, it's against T&Cs to make an issue out of spelling and grammar when it's clear what they meant in the first place.
But on here it only takes one person to make a comment for others to join the bandwagon and try to out-funny each other. :rolleyes:
And moving away from the rules, I think it's pretty damn rude anyway to enter a thread and have your response be poking fun at a spelling / grammar error in the title and completely ignore the topic.
It really doesn't imply that at all. It implies that unconstructive posts correcting spelling are a subset all such posts. Replace unconstructive with any other adjective that fits (e.g long, abusive, capitalised, boring) and you'll see what I mean.
Anyway, glad they're back!
Ooh, do you have a link?
And I totally agree about the Zygons.
Looking forward to seeing the Ice Warriors. They were a great monster to pretend to be in the playground. You just had to make the hands and walk slowly rocking from side to side.
Original New Series Design: http://angriest.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/alternative-silurian.html
I just hope the Ice Warriors have lost their awful hisssssssing voices. The Ice Lords were fine but the generic Warrior were unbearable in my opinion to listen to, not as bad as the torturess Sea Devils, but still unbearable.
Agree about the voices, if only because they take so blooming long to finish a sentence.
Nothing to do with grammar, it's a completely different word. :rolleyes:
See post above (thanks). It was a terrific looking mask.
Many Doctor Who fans excel at slowly rocking side to side.
I can't see them reproducing the original voices. They really are a bit of an ordeal on the ears.
But the voice was the thing that really scared me! It wouldn't be the same for me without that slow deliberate hissing...That is where the menace came from.
True. There must be a way of reproducing that scary thing without actually hurting your ears!
Or get yourself Seeds of Death and get your conceptions all pre'd up.
I saw the Bernard Bresslaw Ice Warrior costume at the Experience exhibition. Terrific - huge and towering. They put it next to the Zygon, opposite the Sontarans and near the (giant) Robot. I was in heaven.
I'm torn - I liked the new Sontarans, but the changes made for the new Silurians took some getting used to. Maybe I'll wait for some shooting pictures/reports and see how much they diverge from their earlier incarnation - if it looks like they'll be pretty close, I might catch the original episodes.
Edit: as a footnote, although I've not watched the episodes, I know the basic plotlines for the stories - and I think that a species that starts out antagonistic but then becomes peaceful good guys over time - albeit with the implication that they could still become a threat - is absolutely perfect for the current era of Who. The one thing Moffat's been good at is giving the various species more depth than just being evil nasties. As well as saving money by re-using masks and costumes, the races in modern Who have much more moral relativism, individuality and varied goals.
Hello, did somebody call?
After a long wrangle on the GD forum the other day, in which I acknowledged myself to be a grammar snob, I actually used "there" instead of "their" in another thread. Luckily, no one seemed to notice, but I was mortified. It was too late to edit by the time I realised.
So even purists like me make mistakes.
Not necessarily true. my phone puts you're instead of your as an autocorrect and I'm often sending a quick message so don't see it. same with their and there and they're sometimes it thinks I mean the other...
anyway looking forward to seeing them onscreen.
"purity" and "Granny McSmith" - not concepts often covered by a single post.
I have to concede that you may be right in this instance.
I have to admit, it grates on me too. I have to restrain myself sometimes from correcting bad grammar and spelling.
I keeping thinking it's like having BO - everyone else knows, but if no-one ever tells you, how are you ever going to fix it? If I spot an error in my own posts quickly enough, I have to go back and correct it.
No-one's perfect.
In the same vain, I think it's pretty poor to be getting there/their/they're wrong. It's something you can learn in five minutes and is really very basic English.
That said, coming from another era (sans mobile technology) it's very possible that these mistakes are coming from autocorrect. Which is a bit scary.
But your feelings on the matter are neither here nor there. On this forum you should avoid unconstructive posts on these matters (for example, saying that someone's posting quality is "poor"). The thread isn't about grammar or spelling so repeated posts bleating on and on about it are against the rules.
edit: I don't mean that to be harsh - correct spelling is useful etc. But extended discussion of it here isn't the place.
If a co-worker has BO and you think they should know about it, do you do it by announcing it loudly to all your colleagues at once in the middle of a conversation about something else?
Awkward...
Well, I guess the the more modern costumes take actor comfort into account, but I hope they do retain a more traditional look, rather than go for, say, a Waters of Mars like skin cracking effect. I reckon, though, that Bernard Breslaw's costume must have stunk to high heaven at the end of the day.