Winlander

While I appreciate your sentiment that you feel a need for more content, I think that we should try to take some pride in our work and do the best we can in whatever we do. This includes wanting to learn to do better. Listening to, and analysing constructive criticism can help us to improve our future efforts. If we misunderstand constructive criticism due to it offending our egos, the unfortunate effect is that we close our minds to what could be helpful, and therefore persist with our mediocrity rather than learn and grow. While having a rudimentary tool is certainly better than having nothing, a finely crafted tool is far more pleasing to use, and enables better results to be achieved. The purpose of language is to communicate effectively. There are some instances where you can butcher language for humorous effect, or to communicate a situation, or even relay a subtle message. In such cases, even though grammatical rules might be broken, effective communication is still the intent and can be achieved. If grammatical mistakes are not deliberately trying to achieve something, then they are merely detracting from effective communication, being a distraction, getting in the way. Good writing usually requires a number of drafts before a polished effort is attained. On paper, this is, of course, best done before publication. In an online environment, it's easy to slam out a post quickly, but it's usually equally easy to correct the published version if errors are spotted. To advocate that readers simply accept error-filled work because an author is either too sensitive to take constructive criticism, or too lazy to bother making corrections, are not convincing arguments to readers wanting something better.