I've seen several bloggers rant about different aspects of written communication (grammar, spelling, word choice, etc). They all have another common thread--those offended by the error don't want to offend those around them by correcting the mistake.

I can agree that there are some times when a mistake should not be corrected--bosses tend to sulk when publically corrected for an improper use of 'whose,' for example. But I find that most people respond positively to a friendly correction, and will often ask for editorial review, realizing that fewer errors in their documents equates to better understanding by the readers. I understand the desire to rant or rave about issues as grave as dangling participles, language is a living process, highly dynamic, and adapted for current usage without guidance. To me, reaching the audience is more important than adherence to rules.

Which do you consider more relevant-strict compliance with rules, or effective communication? Do you think that both are possible? Does the writer's ability alter your opinion of the content?

tempus edax rerum