Large Bananas wrote:Hmm, true, true Kaige, but i don't think Stryker is dyslexic. It just sounds like he's been on MSN too much.
If he WAS dyslexic, then we should give the guy some slack.
Err, I never suggested that Stryker himself
was dyslexic... I doubt he is also, but the thought of someone who very well could
be dyslexic and might join the forum had crossed my mind.
But then there's the whole point that even if someone wasn't
dyslexic and said they were
, then they'd be abusing any slack that people may choose give them. This is the internet after all, and I doubt that anyone would post a doctor's diagnosis as proof of their claim, or anything...
Either way, either we allow ourselves the opportunity to get screwed and have to deal with horrid grammar, or we end up screwing the people who may join this forum and happen to be dyslexic, to which they should still have access to an internet browser capable of spell check, not to mention that they'd probably be trying to overcome the difficulties they're presented with, in which this rule would prove to be (in a way) to their benefit as well as ours.
Holy crap... I think I've just come to my final thought/conclusion on this matter... Been buggin' me for a while...
Yay. Go me.
Ah, anyways... I think that it should be stated that the enforcement of this rule is far from any sort of personal attack - that having difficulty with writing or even spelling would merit anyone with any sense of animosity. Sure, it's a tad annoying in bulk, but it's livable in small, sparse doses.
My key point being: No harm or ill will is meant or felt through the enforcement of these rules. At least, I hope
it doesn't escalate to that point...