i wrote it. and i have a BA in english from a major university. :) what i learned is that for me communication is about the end, not the means. i find "he or she" to be beyond annoying. "they" is technically wrong, but it conveys the message with the most economical clarity.
and sorry i don't use caps to start new sentences....
And if we want to pick on chess.com's grammar, how about the front page daily puzzle "Click the board to try and solve".
Often I try and solve, but equally often I try and fail to solve. Since Erik has confessed to being relatively well educated, and in the English language in particular, I hope that they fixes this soon.
You can read???
"This member's account was closed because he or she was found to be cheating." is ok
"This member's account was closed because they were found to be cheating."
How about this one ?-
"This member's account was closed because this person was found to be cheating"
"This member's account was closed because he or she was found to be cheating." is ok
"This member's account was closed because they were found to be cheating."
How about this one ?-
"This member's account was closed because this person was found to be cheating"
meh....sounds too redundant.
how about this:
"This member's account was closed because this was found to be cheating"
"This member's account was closed because he or she was found to be cheating." is ok
"This member's account was closed because they were found to be cheating."
How about this one ?-
"This member's account was closed because this person was found to be cheating"
CerebralAssassin wrote: meh....sounds too redundant.
how about this:
"This member's account was closed because this was found to be cheating"
"This account was closed because the member was found to be cheating"
"This member's account was closed because he or she was found to be cheating." is ok
"This member's account was closed because they were found to be cheating."
How about this one ?-
"This member's account was closed because this person was found to be cheating"
CerebralAssassin wrote: meh....sounds too redundant.
how about this:
"This member's account was closed because this was found to be cheating"
"This account was closed because the member was found to be cheating"
I think you nailed it artfizz.
I don't see cheaters as human beings.they're practically sub-human (objects)
I dont see how its sexist to use "he/him" when the chances are great that the person referenced is male, such as on this site or when referring to chess players in general.
If the cheating took the form of using a computer, then ...
"This account was closed because it was found to be cheating".
Ok, here is where you guys are going wrong. Many of you are assuming that using only he is sexist. It simply is not. Correct it from they to he. Using he in this specific situation is far from sexist. On the contrary it is correct.
I actually think the problem stems from assuming that using "they" doesn't effectively convey the message. It does.
Ok, here is where you guys are going wrong. Many of you are assuming that using only he is sexist. It simply is not. Correct it from they to he. Using he in this specific situation is far from sexist. On the contrary it is correct.
Why is it ok to obscure a person's gender but not their plurality?
I actually think the problem stems from assuming that using "they" doesn't effectively convey the message. It does.
The problem is that we have English majors who are trying to find some use for their degrees.
The use of the word "scumbag" in reference to a cheater does solve the problem.
Sure it does. They are both singular.