Please stop...

The gerund or progressive form of the verb "rap" must be spelled with a double p. Failure to double up on the "p" is the only climbing related typo that should not be tolerated in a healthy society.

JSH wrote:I'm loosing my mind.

Happened to me decades ago. I claim the FA of that line.

Buff Johnson wrote:okay, not Oklahoma abbreviated

OW (Oll Wright).
I'm knot kidding, and ewe can Wikipedia that.

I should of had something to contribute.

Did I just onsite this thread?

Don't you hate it when you can't pull a move due to lack of heiTH?

SW Marlatt wrote: It is pronounced rappel, but it is spelled abseil.

unless you're Jonny Cash, then it's rapple...spelled just like it sounds

Marc801 wrote:In direct, not indirect. Your shoes have soles, not souls, and your heels go in them, not your heals. Biner, not beaner. Rappel, not repel. You cite a paper and visit a web site. You use jams to climb a crack; the jamb holds your door in place. And ffs, they're holds, not grips!

The offical spelling is website now not web site, they changed it a while ago.

Marc801 wrote:For all intents and purposes. "For all intensive purposes" is like bleach in the eyes.

Seriously, even just hearing that makes me cringe!

This makes no cents.

Then again, it makes a lot of scents.

Please stop talking about a "bite" of rope, unless you're actually eating it. (bight)

And the rope doesn't come "taught," unless it went to school. (taut)

There, I feel better now.

Marc801 wrote:For all intents and purposes. "For all intensive purposes" is like bleach in the eyes.

Oh come on, it is not that bad.

It is kind of funny that this one bugs you so much when they both work out to mean the same things.

Mike Brady wrote:It is kind of funny that this one bugs you so much when they both work out to mean the same things.

No, they don't.
One makes sense, is grammatically correct, and has a long history.
The other one instantly brands the person using it as ill-educated and illiterate.

Marc801 wrote: No, they don't. One makes sense, is grammatically correct, and has a long history. The other one instantly brands the person using it as ill-educated and illiterate.

How is the "incorrect" statement grammatically incorrect. You have an intensive purpose.

As Alec said.. that's no muun.

I'm chomping at the bit to contribute something to this hole thread. How do you guys feel about the Oxford comma?

this is going way better than anticipated based on the original post.
the bits about intents and purposes reminded me of eggcorns...

npr.org/sections/thetwo-way…

Mike Brady wrote: How is the "incorrect" statement grammatically incorrect. You have an intensive purpose.

can you have all intensive porpoises?

This is for all of you double spacers after a period. Just going to put this right here.

slate.com/articles/technolo…