Hilllllarious!  Let me start off by redirecting anyone's belief that I am insulting the forum community at large.  The whole purpose of my first post was to slam the GRAMMAR POLICE.  I can see from the replies that the grammar mafia were, as expected, the most insulting and leanest on value.  I apologize for sounding so pompous to the forum community.  Had I made it clearer that all my comments were for the benefit of the grammar mafia and their own unjustifiable (-able/-ible) arrogance, the rest of you might have looked at that post from a different perspective.

It's so funny that there was no interest in this thread for almost a month until I read one post mocking someone's intelligence, got pissed off and launched on a rant.  It was unforgivable of me (-ible/-able).  I'm really too busy living a life in the real world to waste much precious time in a virtual one, though it seems virtual worlds are preferable (-able/-ible) to those of you beating up on anyone and everyone who decides to post a reply to your sacred thread.  Look at how much work you put into "amusing" avatars and badges to represent yourselves.  As I stated, I only came to this site to get a mod and thought that a thread initiated by GRAMMAR POLICE might be informative and intelligent.  I was mistaken.

I'm amazed that this thread is even allowed to exist, given the ignorance of those purporting to be its mafia squad.   You see, here is an example of IT'S and ITS being properly used.  I probably shouldn't have mentioned one of my pet peeves in the first place since you misunderstood my intent.  Your grammar mafia seem to be truly confused about which to use when.  And my FELLOWS, as you called them, would laugh me out of the room if they knew I visited this type of forum, let alone posted something.

The type of exchange I am used to directs responses to the originator and posters are encouraged to include additional information regarding the topic introduced.  Many of those posts can be quite long, being of a technical nature, and often include links to sites with even more information than is being given in the post.  I was merely utilizing habits I am familiar with when posting to forum threads.

I do appreciate the fact that anyone even made an effort to respond to my post.  I'll try address each of you in turn:

I noticed some of the mafia corrections in here pertained to the use of punctuation marks, but without any clear understanding of how they work.  Therefore, a simple lesson seemed appropriate, for the benefit of the mafia cretins, in the dynamics of how some punctuation rules came into being--from pure mechanics instead of grammatical rules.  There actually is a distinction between punctuation rules and the rules of proper grammar, just as there is a distinction for misspelling.  Just an FYI for those with so little to do that they spend all their time inaccurately making fun of everyone's inaccuracies (per word).  By the way, thanks to the individual for contributing the "full-stop" comment.  I completely forgot that what we call a "period" used to be called "full-stop."

You may want to look up redundant and unnecessary in an unabridged dictionary, though.  Sometimes the meanings of words are truncated in an abridged dictionary in an effort to save space which/that causes people to use the wrong word in the wrong context.  In the computer age, the definition of redundancy has changed from its original meaning and that is the definition that/which is most commonly found in an abridged dictionary.  Also, the term effective is subjective, not objective.  In case anyone is unfamiliar with these words, subjective (in this case) means that/which a topic is subject to a person's own biases.  To be objective is more concrete and agreed upon by the majority.  (The reason I am explaining the difference between these two words and their application is that I won't be checking back to see if anyone else misunderstands me.)  I admit that I fall into the subjective mode when viewing the effectiveness of the written communication being used by the mafia.  It falls miserably short of the mark of a real grammarian.

True, my meaning in that original post got lost in the quagmire.  I was HOT when I wrote it.  Clearly stated:

#1-That post was directed to the ORIGINATOR of this thread and others titling themselves the grammar mafia, not all posters in general.  Don't be so sensitive when you aren't even being insulted (by me, anyway).

#2-I don't care how vulgar or profane you are, in general.  It's an oxymoron, though, for people to declare themselves to be grammarians and yet be unable to express themselves in a civil and educated tone.

#3-Don't declare yourself an expert in something that you obviously don't have a broad command of, like the English language.

#4-Be more sensitive to people's mental capacities.  After all, look at how obviously limited your own capacities are.

No, I didn't believe typos would be an issue on this thread.  By admitting that I probably left behind typos shouldn't offend any of you when text-speak and acronyms are freely used here.  I meant that I'm not perfect, but I'm also not trying to pass myself off as GRAMMAR POLICE.  The length of my former post, and this one as well, should serve to inform the reader that I am able to pound out loads of crap onto a computer quickly.  Anyway, at least I put forth the effort of glancing back over my post (and deleting my more egregious insults).  To be frank, I blasted the grammar mafia pretty harshly before I edited my first post.  Can you imagine if I hadn't edited it? 

I didn't read 99% of the gibberish between page one and page 99999, so I don't understand the post about being cage-matched against someone else.  Perhaps it's another person trying to educate the great unwashed in the grammar mafia?  (The "great unwashed" is a derogatory remark from a long time ago and has dropped out of common use; it has nothing to do with hygiene.  I just like to pull it out to use on people who feel superior to others without any merit for their assumption.)

One person's which is another person's that.  Try reading, a book.  A book on grammar might be a good place to start.  You may learn something.  I have to "read up" on current grammar trends constantly for CPEs that/which are required for my job.  Oh, I'm really sorry!  My former and current intent is not to insult the forum contributors as a whole, just the mafia!

Grammar cat and grammar ferret might want to be more concerned about the "presents" coming out of their own mouths (expressed typographically, of course) instead of dropping one in someone's shoe.

We are living in the 21st century now.  The invention of the typewriter actually took care of the line-slanting problem.  The intent of that tidbit of information was a direct insult to the mafia's attempts to use punctuation rules that they clearly don't understand the origin of.  Knowing why you place which characters where can make it easier to remember what the rules are.  Stupid of me to include that before, but the generous side of me was trying to impart some wisdom on the mafia cretins.  (I just love the word cretin.)

I believe the final post that must be responded to regards how honoured an individual felt after skipping over my little foray into the world of grammar, which/that was directed at the mafia and not the posters in general.  Thank you.  I'm glad I could bring a little honour to your day.  Just kidding; I know you were being sarcastic.

I'm sorry if you responded to my post and I didn't get around to you.  As stated many times before, my post was directed at the grammar mafia and I was really hoping to hear from some of its duly initiated members.

Great job students!  At least I got a dead thread going again.  Now you kiddies will have to cross verbal blades with each other without parental guidance.  I said I would check back to see if anyone reads this thread anymore since it is nonsensical (a real word; look it up in an unabridged dictionary--just a musical way of saying nonsense).  I have done so.  Now I must say goodbye; to say farewell implies that we will be meeting each other again, and that (which?) will not happen.  I know this will reduce the few of you in the mafia who actually deigned to respond to tears, but different paths and all that . . . (ellipsis)

P.S. (Or Post-script to the nit picky)  I hope I gave the reader the option of choosing between which and that every time I used one of those words.  To the person who found my laziness in correcting my own typos funny, this next line should be a hoot.  I didn't go back over this particular installment in English 101!  Hurray!  I think my intentions have been made clear; the mafia needs a makeover and should allow conversations to flow organically.  If a post is indecipherable (-ible/-able), simply ask for clarification.  Less insulting heat may lead to more valuable exchange.

  I'm brand new to this particular "forum," but WOW!

For those in law enforcement, please note that CORRECTLY, any small punctuation mark goes INSIDE the close quotation mark.  Large punctuation marks, such as ? or ! go on the outside.  There is a very interesting reason why this is true and it has nothing to do with grammar.  In the old days of typesetting, actual metal pieces were lined up to assemble a page of print.  It just so happened that typesetters noticed when they placed a small punctuation mark tile OUTSIDE a close quotation tile, the rest of the line of type was slanted.  However, when they placed the small tile INSIDE the close quotation tile, no slanting occured. 

(And yes, it is true, occured can also be spelled occurred, but in today's proper grammar rules most of those redundant consonants are being dumped.  I think the reason is that someone has figured out that a person's actual lifespan can be determined by how many syllables we use--errors such as irregardless and preventative--or the quantity of letters we use in writing during our lifetime and are teaching today's youth to JUST SAY NO.  Any yes, it is also true that one can start a sentence with And or But if they know how to do it correctly.  Enough of my rant and back to the lesson at hand, typesetting.)

The reason for the slanting type can be easily explained mathematically, but the typesetters didn't have time to sit around and speculate, like we obviously do--otherwise why the attraction to forums?  Those old typesetters had to get a paper or periodical or penny dreadful printed and on the street or they would be out of a job.  So, in closing to this particular topic, that is the reason small punctuation marks are placed inside a close quotation mark.  Interesting . . .  (The dots, by the way, are called an ellipsis.  Two dashes placed one right after the other is still called a dash, it just places more emphasis on the break in the sentence.)

I haven't read through this whole thread--just the first and last pages--but wondered if a lesson on split infinitives or past participles has been provided.  I have been out of school for quite a while, doing technical writing by the way, and find that I have trouble remembering the rules for lay, lay, and laid.  Other interesting facts:  (and use of a colon is the proper punctuation mark to use in this situation seeing that I am beginning a list, separated by semicolons) school-aged children today are being taught to use very few commas in their writing (see the above explanation about determining lifespan) but technical writers are encouraged to use many commas so that a reader knows where to stop and digest the technical information they have just consumed; no one in today's society has any clue when to use -ible and when to use -able; very few people know when to use its and when to use it's.  Again, end rant.

Oops, one more thing to add.  I think it is appalling that there is a law enforcement task force which is allowed to use vulgarities and abusive language.  I may be inviting a nasty retort, or nobody reads this thread any more out of lack of interest.  In either case, vilifying someone else by insinuating that they are unintelligent is worse, by far, than overlooking some inadvertent misspelled word or text-speak.  If one can't understand the message someone is sending, a civilized person politely asks for clarification.  Name-calling is juvenile and should be below the standards of someone whose purpose is to monitor the language used on this website.  As you can clearly see by my signature line, you have hit a huge, throbbing nerve when you insult someone's cognitive abilities.  I came here to get the "awesomemod" and thought I would check out some of the forums to see what kind of information is being presented.  I was hoping for something better than what EA has to offer, but after reading a few entries on this thread, I may just satisfy myself with checking in periodically to see if any new updates to the mod are available.

If there is still any interest in this thread, I will look here a couple of times to see if there are any takers . . . (again, an ellipsis.)  I would be most honored to hear back from the originator of the thread (did someone assign the job of GRAMMAR POLICE to this individual or was it an assumed task?), and especially gratified to hear from the originator of the actual website.

Follow Up:  I have glanced over my missive and deleted most, not all, of the derogatory language directed at the grammarian (look it up, it's a valid word).  However, I was in a negative emotional state when I wrote it and pounded it out very quickly.  Some things you may notice are run-on sentences, verbosity, and continuous insults directed to those who are obviously not as erudite as they believe themselves to be.  IF (and I emphasize if) anyone looks at this thread anymore and finds a misspelled word, I apologize in advance.  That is the price you sometimes pay when adept with a keyboard.  Otherwise, the editorial field would be significantly "downsized."

End of rant.