@GrantHeaslip said:
@Pingu44 said:
No, I'm sure they wouldn't, but my issue here is that anyone should feel entitled to complain when there are errors. If the staff wish to set a high standard for themselves, it is incumbent on them to enforce it, not for anyone who has no interest in this other than personal. To rather simplify a point I would hope I've already made, no one apart from the staff has any skin in this game. If they fuck up and people don't like it and stop clicking articles, well, that's their problem, and I imagine it's one they would find out about (or know about already) soon enough. I also imagine that if that was an actual problem they were having, these posts wouldn't be going up in such a fashion that is apparently so unconscionable to so many people (albeit unconscionable for reasons that I genuinely can't fathom, or in this case, see). Not to put words in the mouths of the staff here but I daresay they wouldn't particularly miss the people who seem to get up in arms about some informalities anyway, especially when considering the rest of the site's content is hardly designed to be prim and proper at every available opportunity. Bottom line, everyone needs to lighten the fuck up. We're not debating literature or politics or religion here, we're talking about games. We all love them but they're not so important that we need to pick apart grammatical errors in the discussion of them that are frankly unapparent to most.
I think "unconscionable" is perhaps a stronger wording than what I feel. More than anything, it's baffling — I don't get why he continues to make mistakes that could so easily be rectified.
I get what you're saying, but again, I don't buy your premise. Market economics, in certain contexts, work on a macro level, but I don't think their success rides on Patrick's ability to proofread. In that sense, you're right, it doesn't matter — he could probably write all of their articles with the syntax of a middle-school AIM conversation without substantially impacting their ad impressions (I imagine the videos and reviews are the big traffic drivers).
The standard I'm holding Patrick to isn't about Giant Bomb's material success, it's about respect for his readers and pride in his work. They might not miss me and the other nitpickers, but I think our existence should be seen as a good sign — that there are people who care enough and expect enough to bother.
My apologies if that word is not indicative of your feeling but I wasn't only referring to you, but, while there are plenty of people for whom that term would be apt I shouldn't have generalised.
Ignoring money altogether (as that wasn't the reasoning behind my statement, although I certainly can see how it could be construed as such), Jeff has set out his stall and said on many occasions that games are fun and so should reporting and coverage. It may well be that these minor, miniscule errors (and they are exactly that - they aren't factual errors, they're not even spelling mistakes, they're grammatical in nature and infinitesimally noticeable in stature) are not ones that the staff are concerned by, since this particular edict practically begs for informality. Would it have noticeably improved the article and therefore the site to change some small aspect that exceptionally few people would notice and and an even smaller number would care about? I doubt it highly.
The 'pride in his work' notion is misguided as well in my opinion. Do you know that he takes no pride in his work? Last time I checked he was human and capable of making mistakes, as are the people who would have proof read this and as are the people who have claimed there are mistakes that, frankly, I'm still yet to see. I genuinely see no errors in this, but please, feel free to correct me. I'm sure I'll still not find them nearly as egregious as some apparently do. I think if he had no respect for his readers he wouldn't write for a living, or at the very least he would find it hard to be gainfully employed to do so. What has bothered me about this is that the criticism hasn't been constructive, it's been vague and empty threats. If you genuinely feel there is an error, tell the man. Spitting vitriol (which I'm not accusing you of, but is present here) serves no purpose, especially when that vitriol is over something so unbelievably insignificant yet bears repeating: we are talking about the grammar in what is basically a blog post on a video game site that is known for not taking itself seriously. It's hardly peace in the Middle East we're debating here, is it?
Log in to comment