I don’t understand why you felt the need to comment this or why others felt the need to upvote it. What is your purpose?

“Since the definition of a sentence in Standard English is a construction consisting of a subject noun phrase and a predicate verb phrase, by definition, the answer is that you can’t have a verbless sentence, even short ones: Ice melts, Ducks quack, Winter sucks, etc.— a main verb has to be there.”

https://www.evansville.edu/writingcenter/downloads/sentence-parts.pdf

Fragments can still convey a complete thought without being a sentence: eg “Go!”, “Scalpel!”, “So far, so good.”, etc.

https://www.niu.edu/writingtutorial/punctuation/sentence-fragments.shtml

https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/mechanics/sentence_fragments.html

https://www.grammarly.com/blog/mistake-of-the-month-sentence-fragments/

The title in question was especially bad as it didn’t make sense due to the omitted verb, but still had the structure of a standard sentence, making it even harder to interpret. I am a native English speaker which is why I remember every grammar lesson from pre-k through college saying that a sentence needs to have both a subject and a verb. Sometimes, the subject is implied, like in an imperative sentence, but that’s the exception, not the rule.

And I’m not trying to be a total stickler abt grammar just for the sake of it, but because it is actively poisoning readability and we shouldn’t be rewarding it whether malicious as another commenter had suggested or just out of laziness. There’s no effect that the writer here is achieving by cutting the words the were cut.

I’ll also add that that wikipedia article uses that ‘Jones Winner’ thing, but it would be much less ambiguous to just say ‘Jones Wins’ and so you shoud pretty much always use the second. If this headline wanted to eliminate unnecessary words to minimize wordcount or something, they could easily have taken out their superfluous adjectives rather than the verb which severely hindered readability.

They don’t often drop the only verb of the sentence, rendering it nonsensical.

And also is this actually a common practice? Like, would it be a normal headline to write:

“The forge workers standing up human rights”

Rather than

“The forge workers standing up for human rights” ??

No, Clearly not, as the former makes no goddamn sense. Similar to the title in question. I don’t get why you’re defending this poor practice tho. It doesn’t even make sense for it to be a non English speaker that wrote it making a translation issue because one of the earliest things you learn in English, French, Spanish, etc is that a sentence needs a verb to function.

No. It’s a sentence fragment. It makes no sense and leaves out the end of the thought

You have a poor understanding of sales tax bud

Ok, yeah, sure, but the title doesn’t even make sense as a sentence.

Wtf is this title?

Those are the hadiths which is kinda like a state law vs a national law where the national law overpowers the state law (except in specific circumstances) or how the us constitution overrides national law. The quran is the only book that’s the word of God, and if you take all the hadiths as truth you open Islam up to all kinds of other critiques. Besides that, the shia/sunni split has a ton of hadith issues where they only treat some as truth and not others. For the record it’s not just Muslims or something. All of the Abrahamic religions are immensely fucked and I’m pretty sure I could make a similar case for most others. Even fucking Buddhism is being used to justify an ethnic cleansing rn.

You have definitely made me reflect on what I said and I shouldn’t have made such a claim when I don’t really know what I’m talking about entirely.

Jsyk in this specific context it’s hanged. Weird right?

Like:

Hanged from the neck until death

I can prove objectively that religion is bad for humanity. Can you do the same about atheism? There’s a huge difference between the two. We respect people, not their beliefs. If someone’s a racist, that’s a belief with just as much evidence (aka none/blind faith) as a religion. Do I have to respect their religions? I do think it’s really sad that these people died, though I view it as an easily preventable occurrence, and mostly the fault of those that partook. (The same way that I viewed the submarine)

That’s not what the term martyr means when we’re referring to Islam tho. They’re usually referring to Jihad which is much more specific. (And problematic)

Also, imagine thinking an American dictionary and en English word mean anything when the only ‘true’ reading of this religion is Arabic

Not in that country they ain’t. At least not about most things.

The corvette is the best track car for the price by far, same with certain camaros. And I’m not talking about Nascar tracks, I mean nordschleife times.

Some do. Some, like Shaq or Ryan Reynolds (or Kanye) use their money to invest in other companies. Ryan Reynolds coming out and saying Nazi shit would probably be bad for Mint, just like Ye’s controversy was bad for Yeezy, just like Elon’s controversy is bad for Tesla.

I don’t think she does cracks technically, right? They’re repacks I thought

Poe’s law :(

This is a joke right?

I was able to pirate photoshop for somebody just last year but it’s definitely a bit more in depth than just clicking a magnet link iirc. Doable on windows fs, unsure abt Linux and mac.

You clearly know zero abt copyright law if you think law enforcement is legitimately getting involved. 9.99999999 times out 10 it’s a letter from a lawyer.

Where are IP laws mentioned in the constitution?