Magnarc wrote:

---

We constantly hear Pollies and media using the phrase, "What we do know". The words what and do are not needed but, because someone somewhere coined the phrase and the Sheep think it makes what they are saying more plausible, it suddenly becomes De Rigueur.

I noticed that an advert on tv for a mob flogging spectacles at inflated prices, depicts two people making silly hand gestures and cavorting around like a couple of crazies. Lo and behold within a few days there are more ads doing the same.Very few advertising agencies have an original thought, much easier to get on the bandwagon. A brilliant exception to this would have to be the boy on the bus for the Cadbury ad. That is original thinking.

Where was I? Oh yes I remember, punctuation. Punctuation is vital. All those little dots, commas, etc; they are there to enable the reader to make some sense out of what is written. I like many others, do not always get it right, but I still try to.

Apologies for hijacking the thread.

---

 No need to apologise, Phil, as what you say is correct. There seems to be an obsession with using many more words than necessary to make a simple point. "The reason why is because" makes no sense, and means no more than "The reason is". 

Another one is " reverted back" which means no more than the correct  terminology "reverted to" or indeed simply "went back".

"Redid  it again" Spare me. There are many more. Cheers.

P.S And another. Myself and Bob went to town". So myself went to town did me? . For those who dont  understand, the correct way to convey the information that these two people went to town is "Bob and I went to town". Easy stuff!