SNG Book Announcement:

[MicroBob]

sin and goes.

[fluorescenthippo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Collin is a very knowledge poster. I was skeptical at first because he just recently joined the forums but from what I've seen he knows what he is talking about. I'm sure the book will be good based upon the one or two articles I've already seen him write.

However, with no disrespect towards him, I'm sure it could be better. Before NHLTAP was released didn't a bunch of well respected HSNL guys get to preview and comment on it? The same should happen here. Curtains, gramps, bigjoe03, chrisV, and a few others im forgetting or who stopped playing SnGs would add to the content immensely. Collin is probably the best writer of the bunch, but I'm sure a few of the posters I mentioned have a stronger theoretical background in SnGs. David and Mason please use the resources of the STT forum before publishing this book and I'm sure it will be fantastic.

[/ QUOTE ]

Getting imput from that many people would be a mess and probably disrupt the flow of the book. The man wrote the book, it his book, he didn't ask for help from those guys. If they want to write a book let them get together and do it. Mason thought the book was fine as is, if he thought it wasn't good enough or needed help he would have said something and Colin would have been free to agree or take his book else where. I am sure D&B would have been interested. It is one thing to make a short essay type post on an internet forum, it is quiet another to write a whole book.

RZ

[/ QUOTE ]

yes i see what you are saying.

But David and (probably) Mason lack a full understanding of Sngs so Mason thinking it is fine probably means just that. It is just fine, or okay. I'm just saying extra input using the resources of this forum would help.

At least two of the posters I mentioned have wrote several articles or started a book already. They have more experience playing than Collin does. Yes, Collin didn't publicly ask for help but maybe he should.

[Lottery Larry]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
plural: sit 'n go's


[/ QUOTE ]

My grammar is rusty- why can "go's" be considered a plural form of the word? Are there other examples that are similar in context?

[/ QUOTE ]

Pizza's.

[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't it "pizzas"? I couldn't find anything with a quick search that showed the 's as the plural


(wait, you're pulling my leg, aren't you?)

[fraac]

I'm pulling your leg, yes. "Sit 'n go's" isn't a stylistic choice, it's plain wrong.

[seemorenuts]

Hi Muth, Hi Men,

It seems to me that you have a responsibility to educate the masses that not a single noun in the English language has an apostrophe when pluralized*.

You must act decisively and courageously, lest the Four Horsemen of the Apostrophe rule your domain.

Best Wishes,

S. Nuts


*the broad exception that causes all the confusion is when an abbreviation of a full term comes into common use, e.g. Seemore's Shrimpshack becomes Seemore's. [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

Oh, whew, with the exception of pizza's boy, I think I got my leg pulled.

Lol apropo's-ments

[maurile]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi nuts:

It just so happens that I'm the one who gets to make the decisions that decides how these words are spelled. So it will be:

singular: sit 'n go
plural: sit 'n go's

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]
I would go with sit-and-go and sit-and-gos, myself.

There are a few different ways to write the singular (sit-and-go, sit-n-go, sit'n'go, sit 'n' go, sit & go, etc.), but none of them should form a plural by taking an apostrophe.

"An apostrophe is sometimes used to mark the plural of an acronym, number, or letter -- CPA's (now more usually CPAs), 1990's (now more usually 1990s), and p's and q's (still with apostrophes because the letters are lowercase)." -- Bryan Garner, A Dictionary of Modern American Usage (1998).

While acronyms may take an apostrophe in their plural form (even though the modern trend is to omit the apostrophe), "sit-and-go" and its variants are not acronyms.

The plural should be formed by adding -s or -es. Including an apostrophe is incorrect. To quote Garner again, "Careless writers want to form plurals with wayward apostrophes."

The plural of "go" is generally "goes" ("I'll have a go at it. On second thought, I better have two goes at it.")

But I would omit the "e" when "go" is part of "sit-and-go" (or the like).

Garner again: "No consistent rules are possible for plurals of words ending in -o. But some weak guidelines might be ventured. First, words used as often in the plural as in the singular usually have -oes (embargoes, heroes, potatoes, vetoes). . . . Second, alien-looking words (e.g., imbroglios), proper names (e.g., the Florios -- that is, the Florio family), words that are seldom used as plurals (e.g., bravados), words in which -o is preceded by a vowel (e.g., portfolios), and shortened words (e.g., photos) typically don't take the -e."

I would say that "sit-and-go" qualifies as alien-looking, and I would thus omit the -e when forming its plural.

But either way, including an apostrophe before the -s is just wrong.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi maurile:

I have a couple of experts I can check with and will do so before the book is completely finalized.

Best wishes,
mason

[seemorenuts]

It might help to contact amazon.com and such since insight into their search engine algorithms help.

Standardizing "Holdem" would help too for the same reason.

If you use your apostrophic power wisely, you'd have the authority to suggest standardizations to various dictionaries or at least Wikipedia.

Don't you trust me, you could have from the start.

best wishes [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]

Standardizing "Holdem" would help too for the same reason.



[/ QUOTE ]

The correct spelling is hold 'em (short for hold them). I don't think you can stop people from misspelling it.

[jackaaron]

Could it be sits n go (plural)?

j/k [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img]