Am I the only one this annoys?

[MuggedByReality]

   Loads of otherwise intelligent people write "acquiesce to"

[enwiabe]

   Loads of otherwise intelligent people write "acquiesce to"

I am disinclined to acquiesce this request.

[MuggedByReality]

 A blogger I used to read proposed this manifesto:

           Flogging Offences

    * Use of the Grocer's Apostrophe;
    * Starting paragraphs in a newspaper article with the word "And". Especially if you are a politician;
    * Blaming the weapon, rather than the person wielding it;
    * Driving in the middle lane of a busy motorway without good cause;
    * Advocating Socialism as a means for organising the relationships between communities larger than a small farm;
    * Confusing correlation with causation;

     Flogging Offences. Such flogging to be administered on the steps of the perpetrator's club
      This is separate category of crime, where it is important that a visible example is set.

    * Advocating Socialism for communities larger than a small farm, when one is in a position of power;
    * Advocating Creationism when one ought to know better;
    * Inviting, on live television, an evidently distressed relative to advocate a ban on whatever it was that killed the recently deceased person in question;
    * Confusing "equality of outcome" with "equality of opportunity".
   
      Hanging Offences.
       Let's not beat about the bush: We have to make a stand and stop this dangerous nonsense.

    * Preferring "equality of outcome" over "equality of opportunity";
    * Advocating Creationism when one is in charge of educational policy or children or both;
    * Moral Equivalence;
    * Unwarranted use of the split infinitive.

[binders]

Loads of otherwise intelligent people write "acquiesce to"

what's wrong with "acquiesce to"? if you can use "in" with it, why not to?
a quick search shows D. H. Lawrence and Daniel Defoe using "to", and
even some literary examples of "with".

[Mr Edwards]

I hate it when people mix up the English used between the US and Australia. Like saying "average joe" and "enrollment" instead of "enrolment". But I suppose its fine in a forum like this. In fact I encourage poor grammar/spelling as this eases tensions and creates a calmer, laid back forum environment.

[vexx]

I hate it when people mix up the English used between the US and Australia. Like saying "average joe" and "enrollment" instead of "enrolment". But I suppose its fine in a forum like this. In fact I encourage poor grammar/spelling as this eases tensions and creates a calmer, laid back forum environment.

never encouraged! to ease tensions one would use internet slang/informal syntax - and the like, not poor spelling.. this should never be encouraged!!!! (lots of people, if not most have spell-check these days anyways)

[Ghost!]

Firefox's spell check is lovely.

[Eriny]

A blogger I used to read proposed this manifesto:

           Flogging Offences

    * Use of the Grocer's Apostrophe;
    * Starting paragraphs in a newspaper article with the word "And". Especially if you are a politician;
    * Blaming the weapon, rather than the person wielding it;
    * Driving in the middle lane of a busy motorway without good cause;
    * Advocating Socialism as a means for organising the relationships between communities larger than a small farm;
    * Confusing correlation with causation;

     Flogging Offences. Such flogging to be administered on the steps of the perpetrator's club
      This is separate category of crime, where it is important that a visible example is set.

    * Advocating Socialism for communities larger than a small farm, when one is in a position of power;
    * Advocating Creationism when one ought to know better;
    * Inviting, on live television, an evidently distressed relative to advocate a ban on whatever it was that killed the recently deceased person in question;
    * Confusing "equality of outcome" with "equality of opportunity".
   
      Hanging Offences.
       Let's not beat about the bush: We have to make a stand and stop this dangerous nonsense.

    * Preferring "equality of outcome" over "equality of opportunity";
    * Advocating Creationism when one is in charge of educational policy or children or both;
    * Moral Equivalence;
    * Unwarranted use of the split infinitive.

Bah! The split infinitive is fine, there is nothing wrong with splitting infinitives in English because you physically can. This isn't Latin!

[uhmmaybe]

I hate it when people mix up the English used between the US and Australia. Like saying "average joe" and "enrollment" instead of "enrolment". But I suppose its fine in a forum like this. In fact I encourage poor grammar/spelling as this eases tensions and creates a calmer, laid back forum environment.

Oh yes same! I don't like when people spell words with z when it's meant to be s

[MuggedByReality]

Loads of otherwise intelligent people write "acquiesce to"

what's wrong with "acquiesce to"? if you can use "in" with it, why not to?
a quick search shows D. H. Lawrence and Daniel Defoe using "to", and
even some literary examples of "with".

It's intransitive, so technically incorrect. However that usage has become so prevalent that the grammar authorities seem to have acquiesced in permitting it.
 
 Curiously, how are you able to do a quick search through the writings of  D. H. Lawrence and Daniel Defoe?

[darren94]

who says 'should of' lol?

oops

[LFTM]

"yous" annoys me too

[stonecold]

Loads of otherwise intelligent people write "acquiesce to"

what's wrong with "acquiesce to"? if you can use "in" with it, why not to?
a quick search shows D. H. Lawrence and Daniel Defoe using "to", and
even some literary examples of "with".

It's intransitive, so technically incorrect. However that usage has become so prevalent that the grammar authorities seem to have acquiesced in permitting it.
 
 Curiously, how are you able to do a quick search through the writings of  D. H. Lawrence and Daniel Defoe?

I don't know the word haha but intransitive means it cannot take any objects. 

[binders]

It's intransitive, so technically incorrect. However that usage has become so prevalent that the grammar authorities seem to have acquiesced in permitting it.
 
 Curiously, how are you able to do a quick search through the writings of  D. H. Lawrence and Daniel Defoe?

hmm, not sure its intransitivity is an obstacle. you can bow, or bow to someone. the prepositional phrase still works with the intransitive verb.
as for searching, i just google (site:gutenberg.org search string). i use it mostly with thelatinlibrary.com, but gutenberg for english usage.

"yous" annoys me too

i use youse all the time when parsing so i don't have to write (2nd pl.) all the time, but spell it with an e.

[Russ]

The split infinitive is fine, there is nothing wrong with splitting infinitives in English because you physically can.

You are dead to me