So, yeah, while misuse of literally literally bugs the shit out of me a lot, I'm fairly tossed up about whether it's worth bugging out over. The recent surfacing of the 'poisonous/venomous' distinction smacks of pop-culture faddism and as such, is just dull and tedious.
Academics, scientists, and engineers generally understand these details (indeed, Dalton Caldwell almost certainly _does_ know the distinction, being as he was, I gather, a 'Founder/CEO of a Sequoia portfolio company'). Complicated, careful work (in nuclear physics or space launches, for instance) generally depends on this, no doubt.
But outside those domains -- in a personal blog, for instance, or when noodling catfish in the bayou, say -- splitting infinitives might be ok, or even a shibboleth. See Dave Chappelle's analysis on Inside The Actors Studio regarding speaking as a black American.
And, while I don't care to hurtle ad-hominems ad-hoc, if you _are_ going to be pedantic about the minutiae of someone else's considered work, it's possibly worth knowing that the word is 'vicinity'.
I'm vaguely aware that my writing style is somewhat dense. I try to work on that, I really do. Still, I consider yours a sort of compliment -- an obscure achievement.
Academics, scientists, and engineers generally understand these details (indeed, Dalton Caldwell almost certainly _does_ know the distinction, being as he was, I gather, a 'Founder/CEO of a Sequoia portfolio company'). Complicated, careful work (in nuclear physics or space launches, for instance) generally depends on this, no doubt.
But outside those domains -- in a personal blog, for instance, or when noodling catfish in the bayou, say -- splitting infinitives might be ok, or even a shibboleth. See Dave Chappelle's analysis on Inside The Actors Studio regarding speaking as a black American.
And, while I don't care to hurtle ad-hominems ad-hoc, if you _are_ going to be pedantic about the minutiae of someone else's considered work, it's possibly worth knowing that the word is 'vicinity'.