I find it ridiculous that we spend energy on debating whether an alternate spelling is "correct" - real people, not English professors and dictionary authorities, are the authorities on English-as-used, and will ultimately make the distinction irrelevant.

accepting an answer doesn't mean it is the best one. For me it is interesting how argumentation of some users is reduced to "Hey, the editor has 5000+ edits. Do not ever think that a particular edit was wrong."

They sound like "argument by prestige". If MSDN says it, or some famous developer or author whom everybody likes says it, it must be so.

According to Google (not that they are the end all of browser knowledge)

But because it is espoused by so many leading members of the JavaScript community, scrutiny is all too rarely applied.

It’s written by Sindre Sorhus, whose npm profile is enough to make all but the most prolific developer feel wholly inadequate, and so carries with it a degree of authority.

Despite their awarded diplomas in the art of writing, you'd be surprised at how many editors and journalists in the United States make English mistakes. For instance, "an" is still often coupled with words that begin with an "H" sound, even though this is improper. I'd advise against treating material from news sources as if it were error-free or even a higher authority on grammar.

Of Signs, one kind bears the same relation to the statement it supports as the particular bears to the universal, the other the same as the universal bears to the particular. The infallible kind is a "complete proof" (tekmerhiou); the fallible kind has no specific name.