RANT: "Should of"

Molly · Post by **Molly** » April 25 14, 7:52 am

It's should HAVE people. Not "We should of traded for so and so" but "We should HAVE traded for so and so."

Sister Mary Altar Rail and her catholic grade school grammar education signing off. Carry on

AWvsCBsteeeerike3 · Post by **AWvsCBsteeeerike3** » April 25 14, 7:55 am

shoulda

jim · Post by **jim** » April 25 14, 8:14 am

I thought this was about something else. Here is what I hear from our SharePoint admins/developers daily:

"That should have worked".
"That should not have done that".
"It should work".

Yeah, it should, and it didn't - as usual. So now what?

slide_into_first · Post by **slide_into_first** » April 25 14, 8:44 am

It's because of dumbing down advertising that tells us to "eat mor chikin."

slide_into_first · Post by **slide_into_first** » April 25 14, 8:45 am

I'd blame Eudora Welty and Cormac McCarthy, but no one reads anymore.

ghostrunner · Post by **ghostrunner** » April 25 14, 9:09 am

I still see "all the sudden." How do people make this mistake?

stlouie_lipp · Post by **stlouie_lipp** » April 25 14, 9:57 am

AWvsCBsteeeerike3 wrote:shoulda

woulda, coulda

jim · Post by **jim** » April 25 14, 10:15 am

He should of gone with Joe and I.

wart57 · Post by **wart57** » April 25 14, 1:11 pm

jim wrote:He should of gone with Joe and I.

That don't make no sense.

Post by **Radbird** » April 25 14, 3:31 pm

Molly wrote:It's should HAVE people. Not "We should of traded for so and so" but "We should HAVE traded for so and so."

Sister Mary Altar Rail and her catholic grade school grammar education signing off. Carry on

You probably have perfect penmanship too.

GatewayRedbirds.com

RANT: "Should of"

RANT: "Should of"

Re: RANT: "Should of"

Re: RANT: "Should of"

Re: RANT: "Should of"

Re: RANT: "Should of"

Re: RANT: "Should of"

Re: RANT: "Should of"

Re: RANT: "Should of"

Re: RANT: "Should of"

Re: RANT: "Should of"