I only read the first and third articles because I'm a f2p player.

 

 

 

Both of them were great IMO.

 

 

 

Clearly you, like our four authors, could use a proof-reader. I was somewhat disappointed to note that none of the articles this week were grammatically flawless.

 

 

 

To err is to human. Nobody is perfect. Don't tell me you don't make a single grammatical or spelling mistake.

 

 

 

If you're going to criticise my comments on grammar, at least get your own right. To err either 'is to be' or just 'is', not 'is to'.

 

 

 

 

[humor]Besides, replying to the thread with nothing productive in the same amount of time you could have sent in corrections is definitely the right thing to do. :D [/humor]

 

 

 

 

Fair point, yes I could send in corrections (and for the purposes of this response I'll ignore your own mistakes above), but as a reader that's not my job. It's a little like saying J.K. Rowling doesn't need to bother about grammar in her Harry Potter books because the readers can just write back with corrections. :P

 

 

 

In my opinion the corrections should be made before 'going to press', especially given many of the errors in this week's articles would be easy to fix. The only reason I comment on errors is because I feel they detract from my reading experience and in fact can often completely ruin a good post.

 

 

 

Hah. In your face.

 

 

 

Do you think I wouldn't have checked out that the real idiom is "to err is human"/"to err is to be human"? I was just making my point. "To err is to human" is a mistake. So what? I mean what the hell? We're all humans. We make mistakes. Its not like we are perfect.

 

 

 

Great argument... I feel so stupid... :^o

I don't normally read the articles thoroughly, however the partyhat dupe one peaked my interest. I read the entire thing, great article. (Just gotta read the others now I think though ;) )

 

 

 

Although whenever the dupe is mentioned.. it makes me wonder if the hat I have is an original or a duped... (Too bad that's unanswerable ;) )

Eventually, however, no need for however Tip.It announced a partnership with Jagex.

 

 

 

That sentence confused the hell outta me.

 

Lol, dude that is definitely one horrible sentence, I don't even get it - very sorry for that. I don't know if I wrote that, or if it's an editing hiccup. :P

 

 

 

I think it's trying to say that when the partnership deal was created or made public...etc, go on into the next sentence.

Eventually, however, no need for however Tip.It announced a partnership with Jagex.

 

 

 

That sentence confused the hell outta me.

 

Lol, dude that is definitely one horrible sentence, I don't even get it - very sorry for that. I don't know if I wrote that, or if it's an editing hiccup. :P

 

 

 

I think it's trying to say that when the partnership deal was created or made public...etc, go on into the next sentence.

 

 

 

It was an editing goof. I just looked it over. Sorry, skatedog, that one was on us.

 

 

 

The sentence should've read like this:

 

 

 

"Eventually, Tip.It announced a partnership with Jagex."

Great article

omg, lol, in the middle of reading the dupeing article I was all ready to go to the grand exchange and buy up a ton of party hats at the new low prices, and then I read the part about it being in 2003. Wow:( too bad.