I don't know who keeps thinking that the way to address the problem of the autocensor destroying our language is to delete posts complaining about it, but they could hardly be more wrong.
This site would censor the plays of Shakespeare, ban a classic monologue by Stanley Holloway OBE, class words on a website associated with this country's head of state, HM Queen Elizabeth II, as foul and abusive and so on.
Where's the explanation of why this is OK?
Where's the authority for telling people that much of what is in the dictionaries is wrong?
Where's the justification for removing my post? Does the lack of it confirm my suspicion that there isn't actually a rule against complaining about things which are wrong?
The thing to do is to fix the problem, not try to pretend that there isn't one.
This site would censor the plays of Shakespeare, ban a classic monologue by Stanley Holloway OBE, class words on a website associated with this country's head of state, HM Queen Elizabeth II, as foul and abusive and so on.
Where's the explanation of why this is OK?
Where's the authority for telling people that much of what is in the dictionaries is wrong?
Where's the justification for removing my post? Does the lack of it confirm my suspicion that there isn't actually a rule against complaining about things which are wrong?
The thing to do is to fix the problem, not try to pretend that there isn't one.
