Home Forums Chat Forum Who gives a **** about an Oxford Comma?

  • This topic has 24 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 7 years ago by pondo.
Viewing 25 posts - 1 through 25 (of 25 total)
  • Who gives a **** about an Oxford Comma?
  • Stoner
    Free Member

    One for the grammer Nazi’s;

    Lack of Oxford Comma Could Cost Maine Company Millions in Overtime Dispute

    And of course a chance to enjoy:

    scaredypants
    Full Member

    One for the grammer Nazi’s;

    Are they related to the Spellen Stazi ?

    mefty
    Free Member

    For an education in grammar, $10 million seems very good value.

    keithb
    Full Member

    I think the education in grammar is needed for the person who wrote the legislation. Given it has got to an appeal court, it clearly isn’t a clear cut usage. Unfortunately it seems that the drivers have been getting underpaid and the company will now get stuffed for it…

    This is why if writing an exclusive list, I use bullet points!

    slowoldman
    Full Member

    I thought this was the reason lawyers didn’t use punctuation at all?

    MSP
    Full Member

    If they had written a law that didn’t have unreasonable exclusions, grammar wouldn’t even be a consideration. FFS how can a law be passed that protects workers rights then exclude some workers because they are not deemed important enough to warrant the same legal protection as everyone else.

    Mister-P
    Free Member

    One for the grammer Nazi’s

    Grammar Nazis 😉

    frankconway
    Free Member

    Nazis, not Nazi’s 😆 but that’s a missing apostrophe, not a comma.

    ‘I like cooking my family and dogs’

    ‘Don’t wear black people’

    ‘Let’s eat grandpa’

    Commas – or the absence of them – do make a difference 😀

    These ones are amusing but there are several examples in business which have resulted in big costs and losses.

    imnotverygood
    Full Member

    I’m being dense here, but I don’t see what difference the comma makes in this instance. I can’t see how one meaning would exclude delivery drivers whilst the other one would.

    Rorschach
    Free Member

    I hate my parents,Godzilla and Donald Trump.
    (I don’t hate Godzilla btw)

    Cougar
    Full Member

    Commas – or the absence of them – do make a difference

    Indeed. After an unfortunate misunderstanding one time, I haven’t been horse-riding with my Uncle Jack since.

    thecaptain
    Free Member

    My parents, Lynn Truss and Gyles Brandreth.

    To name 4. Or do I mean 2?

    Stoner
    Free Member

    phew I’m glad Mister P and frank are on the ball. I might of missed that. 😉

    imnotverygood
    Full Member

    Assuming the latest posts are an answer to my question: Yes I understand how an Oxford comma can avoid confusion, but in the case cited I don’t. If it said “packing and distribution then I can see where the problem might be. But packing or distribution…… nope.

    cheers_drive
    Full Member

    I shit at grammer but get the Oxford comma, but as above don’t see how it affects the case in question

    frankconway
    Free Member

    Thanks Stoner – maybe I’ve found my true vocation……. 😆

    Mister-P
    Free Member

    . I might of missed that.

    Of instead of have? Now I know you are being a joker.

    Drac
    Full Member

    Utterly pointless use of grammar.

    Stoner
    Free Member

    as the article says, does the law intend to exempt workers in the distribution of the three following categories, or does it mean to exempt the packers of the three categories stated afterwards?

    takisawa2
    Full Member

    Brilliant band. Seen them a couple of times.

    RustySpanner
    Full Member

    theotherjonv
    Free Member

    I’m being dense here, but I don’t see what difference the comma makes in this instance. I can’t see how one meaning would exclude delivery drivers whilst the other one would.

    if instead of a list separated by commas, it was a bulletpoint list, would that list be:

    – canning
    – processing
    – preserving
    – freezing
    – drying
    – marketing
    – storing
    – packing for shipment or distribution

    or would it be

    – canning
    – processing
    – preserving
    – freezing
    – drying
    – marketing
    – storing
    – packing for shipment
    – distribution

    It is a very fuzzy differentiation but that’s what the court ruled, that it’s sufficiently uncertain that it might exclude them but might not.

    imnotverygood
    Full Member

    Ahh right Get it now. Ta

    ourmaninthenorth
    Full Member

    I thought this was the reason lawyers didn’t use punctuation at all?

    Standard myth.

    The legal documents in which you’re most likely to find a paucity of punctuation tend to be related to land (purchase documents, leases, etc.). But those guys tend to be pretty antiquated at the best of times.

    Lawyers spend inordinate amounts of time negotiating detailed drafting with each other, so anything where there is a potential for confusion tends to be ironed out. Unless, of course, the lawyers were state educated….

    There’s actually another issue with the clause: the “and” at the end of sub-clause (2)….

    pondo
    Full Member

    Brilliant band. Seen them a couple of times.

    I got the reference too, and I never get stuff like that – go me! 🙂

Viewing 25 posts - 1 through 25 (of 25 total)

The topic ‘Who gives a **** about an Oxford Comma?’ is closed to new replies.