I’m not necessarily against correcting someone’s grammar, but when doing so you should first make sure that you are right.
I’ve heard people make a stink over the difference between insignificant and insubstantial, claiming that people often use “insignificant” when they mean “insubstantial.” The problem is that the two concepts are related. While something can be insubstantial and still be significant, it is significant only because its effects are substantial. Often, when one claims “it” is significant, the “it” refers to something other than what the grammar Nazi takes it to mean. Anyways, the two concepts go together well over 99% of the time. The amount of the time they do not go together is both insubstantial and insignificant.
The same happens with imparted and imputed. I once heard a preacher claim that God’s righteousness is not imparted to us, but only imputed, and that this is an important difference between sects. The thing is, the way I have heard spiritual growth described, the righteousness is imputed first, and it immediately begins to be (usually gradually) imparted because it was imputed! Besides, God is the one doing the imputing. If God imputes righteousness, but does not then impart it, it makes God a liar! This preacher didn’t even know that he was calling God a liar. Clearly, the righteousness God imputes is also imparted, so it is not wrong to use either word to describe it.
People also fret over the difference between less and fewer. You can have less milk, but you have fewer gallons. You can have less bread, but you have fewer crumbs. Sometimes it is hard to know which to use. If you have fifty fewer gallons, you also have fifty gallons less. Many times people are not specific. They have less milk and so they say “I have fewer.” Fewer what? Molecules? Drops? Glasses? Kilograms? Calories? Unless they actually say “fewer milk,” they are not wrong. People have fewer gallons and so they say “I have less.” Less what? Milk? Sand? Fish? Fish (the material) comes in units (fishes or fish), so you can have both less and fewer fish.
Do you lay down or lie down? You might lay down a box, but if you lay yourself down, it’s called lying down. If lying is nothing more than the laying of oneself, who cares? Use either!
The one word people seem to understand less than any other is ironic. Most situations called ironic that other people claim lack irony, do have irony in there somewhere if you actually look for it. A traffic jam when one is already late is ironic because both jams and being late are relatively rare (If traffic in your city is normally jammed, you do not call it a jam, but just traffic; if you are always late by some standard, you come to expect it, and are therefore not truly late by the standards of being you.). That the two situations would occur together is doubly rare, and therefore not expected. In fact, one would tend to expect the opposite. A day that you are late would be unlikely to have a traffic jam. Expecting one thing and getting the reversal is the definition of irony. Irony requires a connection. Expecting strawberry ice cream and getting chocolate is not ironic when there are thirteen other flavors it could have been. However, if chocolate is the one and only flavor you can never have (allergy, maybe) it would be, especially if there were even more flavors. That the two situations (you being allergic to chocolate and you of all people being the one that receives of all flavors chocolate) would connect is statistically very unlikely. The same can be said of a man who never flies due to his fears, and then when he does finally take his first flight, he crashes. The same can be said of having a thousand spoons when all you need is one knife. Knives and spoons are very similar, unlike knives and signatures on your proposal. They have a connection.
What’s wrong with you people?