Wouldn't it be smoother if it was the following:

This thread is nearing the 1,000 post limit.  Please request that your GM create a new thread.

Much smoother, and less clunky.

+1 for this specific edit, unless someone comes up with a better one

How about, "This thread is nearing the 1,000 post limit.  AAAAH WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE!!"

Concise and to the point!  But Dara's is nice, too.

In reply to Utsukushi (msg # 6):

Dammit, where is the like button?!

+1 for it being reworded slightly...

"This thread is nearing the 1,000 post limit and is reaching critical mass.  Thread self destruct commencing.  Please ask you GM to provide a system override."

Not really. "that" adds nothing to the sentence in terms of meaning or grammar. It actually meakes the grammar worse, because in your sentence "that" is stripped of any meaning.

"Please request your GM creates a new thread" is fine gramatically and in meaning and is identical to "please request that your GM create a new thread". Although it might need to be 'GM create' rather than 'GM creates'. I'm not totally sure on that point.

If it is changed to make it easier to read then 'request' should come out to read "please ask your GM to create a new thread" or "please remind your GM to create a new thread". It seems like the debate about grammar is due to using 'request'.



+1
This message was last edited by the user at 08:50, Wed 03 Sept 2014.

Or leave it as it is, since it isn't actually wrong.

Also, nothing happens when a thread passes the limit, except that it becomes impossible to view the whole thread, so the comments about "critical mass" and "self destruct" would be completely incorrect.

That was the point I was trying to make :) It isn't wrong as it stands and if you're going to be pedantic your proposed alterations should be correct.

For the funny types,

"This thread is soon to be at maximum size. Please tell your GM to stop being lazy, get off their lazy bum, and avoid the undesirable effect of vanishing posts by making a new thread for all the hardworking players to post their carefully crafted walls of text.

P.S. Congratulations on having a game actually last long enough to see this message."

+1

At least here in the U.S., the second sentence sounds grammatically incorrect and should be "request your GM to create a new thread" or "that your GM create a new thread."  The present tense "s" on the "create" is where the problem lies.

Though it is totally a cultural thing, and not an actual error.

Yep entirely cultural.  Bearing in mind that the vast majority of moderators, and the Admin himself, aren't from the US.

Fair enough. I hate some of these cultural things. Realise has an S dang it. Colours has a U dang it >.<

In reply to Heath (msg # 13):

As a trained teacher of English-as-a-Second-Language who grew up in the U.S., I would say that, "request your GM to create a new thread" sounds distinctly non-native to me and would suggest the student try again.  ;-)

It's all relative, I suppose.  The way it's worded now, however, is fine by international English standards.

In reply to cruinne (msg # 17):

Funny how a simple please at the beginning of "request your GM to create a new thread" Makes it sound better.

Which raises a question to me of: why do so many people claim saying please is begging...

They don't; but they do claim that in the modern era it is overused, pro forma, and insincere.

And I cannot tell you how many times I've been accused of being rude despite saying please. ;-)  Despite that, I tend to use it since I was raised that way.
This message was last edited by the user at 20:05, Wed 03 Sept 2014.

In reply to cruinne (msg # 17):

However, your student would be correct, although there are many ways to skin a cat, as they say.  See, e.g.:

http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/request+to+do

"Please request your GM to create a new..." is the grammatically accurate way to say it. (I have a doctorate and write for a living, so give me a little credit too.) "your GM" is the indirect object, with the prepositional phrase being the direct object.  In an SVO language like English, it should be subject-verb-indirect object-direct object.

:)

o.0

Ok, How can a guy who cannot even remember how to diagram a sentence argue with that lol?

In reply to Heath (msg # 20):

Right, but you recognize that the way it is now is perfectly acceptable too, right?

Ok, upon reflection my initial post sounded bad.  I should have used parentheses and commas.  How's this:

Please request of your GM that a new thread be created.

Why not simply say "This thread is near 1000 post limit. Please ask your GM to create a new thread?"

Then again, another culture thing. Just as valid as the other one.

There's an old saying, not necessarily the best English itself, of "if it aint broke, don't fix it".

I think that applies here.  (c;

In reply to jase (msg # 25):

Yep.  I don't think anyone misunderstands it.

I agree that it is understandable as is, but it just doesn't sound right to me.

Of course, english originally had no specific grammer until recently (as languages go) when a few scholars decided to define a proper grammer for english, therefore it is only to be expected that grammer issues will pop up from time to time that not everyone will be happy with.