People that write "of" instead of "have", such as "should of" instead of "should have". Or even "might of" instead of "might have"...

That should be "People who write" 

Finch:

 

Might of said this one before not sure...

 

 

 

People that buy your auction on Trade Me, then a short time later, "Oh sorry I dont need it anymore"

 

 

 

RAGEEEEEEEEEEE

 

Aren't there sanctions against that kind of thing? I mean beyond just negative feedback. I think Trade Me has some kind of notification about being legally obligated to complete the purchase.

freitasm:

 

People that write "of" instead of "have", such as "should of" instead of "should have". Or even "might of" instead of "might have"...

 

 

 

 

 

Please do not get me started.

Enquire and inquire

Insure and ensure

Yous instead of you (should be summary execution for that one)

Sort instead of sought

Knive instead of knife

Misused apostrophes such as "Come in and enjoy food cooked by our chef's!"

I could go on...the number of crimes against the English language committed here each day is greater than the number of KFC bargain buckets sold.

and try the English... they SUCK at their own language as a whole :)

Loose and lose.

That one bugs me, see it quite often. 

freitasm:

 

People that write "of" instead of "have", such as "should of" instead of "should have". Or even "might of" instead of "might have"...

 

I could go either way on this one. The english language is evolving,  'of' in your examples has become very common such that it may soon be accepted as valid usage.

The problem with "should of" is that it doesn't make logical sense, not to mention that it looks downright bizarre in some cases. Here's an example of going between tenses:

"I should have eaten a burger" -> "I have eaten a burger"
"I should of eaten a burger" -> "I of eaten a burger"

Edit: My first example didn't make sense either :)

Edit 2: Aargh! Muphry's law strikes again!

On the flipside, I do like it when people do a rant about spelling/grammar, and spell/use something wrong in doing so.  Always good for a chuckle.

frankv:

 

How many people have been injured in the last 18 years when it did run? Last year "everyone emerged unscathed".

 

This concept annoys me, that health and safety has a memory.

Often when I walk to the bus stop, early in the morning on my way to work, I'll get to the road and find nothing coming either way.

It's a cool buzz to know that I haven't had to wait at all.

If I did that 18 days in a row, should I walk across the 19th time without even looking?

Which leads in general to the mix between excitement from doing something potentially harmful, vs the general surprise and outrage when someone does get harmed.

Be it those longboard idiots on public roads or sports that are the modern day equivalent of gladiators etc such as rugby and boxing.

We need to wake up to the fact that the risk is what makes it interesting, and that taking that away does impact on the spectacle.

Then either come to terms with that or don't bother, because you can't have your cake and eat it too.

Behodar:

 

The problem with "should of" is that it doesn't make logical sense, not to mention that it looks downright bizarre in some cases. Here's an example of going between tenses:

 

"I should have eaten a burger" -> "I have eaten a burger"
"I should of eaten a burger" -> "I of eaten a burger"

 

Edit: My first example didn't make sense either :)

 

Edit 2: Aargh! Muphry's law strikes again!

 

Ha ha, you cannot apply logic to language. 

Chop up a tree, for example. 

Perhaps, there needs to be a separate language thread haha. 

On the topic of wrong usage: