A little thinking to start the day

Good morning! We're all back at work today, so I hope you're hanging in there. Let's get going, shall we?

My friend MLW sent this to me a while back, and I wanted to read the entire article before posting it, and it's kinda long, so I put it off a while, and, well, I finally got there. It's got a few errors going on, so let's look at a couple. First, here's the reason MLW sent it in:

screengrab by Me!

This is a little bit of a clunky graph, but of course, the big offender is that FOR missing its R. "which he'd been making FOR years." That's a weird one, because spellcheck should have caught it. This is where ignoring the squiggles can land you!

Here's the other thing I wanted to share with you. Just have a look, and then we'll discuss:

DRAMA.

Hari-kari isn't the word. Yes, that's how we usually say it. Common usage and all that. But technically, it's hara-kiri. Here's the wiki page for it, which is very interesting.  Terms like this should be avoided in writing unless you are REALLY CERTAIN of how to spell it and how to use it. I'm not absolutely certain that flushing an established brand down the toilet, so to speak, is akin to ritual suicide. Seems a little dramatic, no? I'm also not sure you should use a metaphor to explain a metaphor. Why bother explaining, then? It's a risky endeavor, is what I'm saying, and should probably be left to those willing to do a little more fact-checking and research. Well, in language, anyway. The article does appear to be thoroughly researched, subject-wise. 

What do you think? Do you think common usage wins here?  Do tell.

(Thanks, MLW!)