>>92407272I am
>>92405580 (me), the other posts were a different anon, but no I am not confused, and he is not wrong. You are in fact 100% wrong, because you are committing an idiotic excel-brained appeal to authority fallacy.
My source... is that I am a native-born English speaker. In other words, direct observation, experience, and expertise with the reality of the language from speaking it on a daily basis. This is a better source than you have provided, and the fact that two anons in the wild both independently happen to assert this holds far more weight than a blogpost from some nobody and literal fucking AISlop.
The fact that you would unironically say something as laughably asinine and anti-intellectual as asking for an "accredited source" for this claim and then treating it as dispositive over the direct evidence of your own eyes is genuinely disturbing. As if academic credentials take priority over reality itself somehow? As if professors have some divine authority to determine the nature of an organic, emergent phenomenon like language, rather than the aggregate outcomes of choices made by the people who SPEAK it? This is borderline magical thinking and indicative of someone who has been brainwashed into losing all critical thinking ability - and also points to you being an ESL, as this mentality treats the English language as a subject to be studied scholastically, from an abstract and distant point of view, rather than a skill developed to casual fluency by a lifetime of communication with other speakers on the ground.
I'm pretty sure I know which anon you are from your algorithmic pseud thought and speech patterns, so none of the above is surprising to me in the least and I certainly don't expect you to have the humility or intellect to admit that you were wrong, let alone recognize WHY you were wrong. But that doesn't make it any less repulsive on numerous levels, and I strongly suggest you consider the following.
