It's not unusual to stumble upon some epic feuds while perusing Twitter. However, when snapping in support of some hilarious clapback, you're usually supporting a comedian or activist or particularly witty teenager— not a widely-trusted dictionary.
But yesterday was different. Twitter got off to a weird start that morning:
It started out with Merriam-Webster's mildly sassy tweet, clarifying how we can use the word 'mad.'
But Gabriel Roth, a senior editor at Slate, was NOT having it because, in his view, the dictionary was trying too hard to be cool and relevant.
He went on to remind Twitter that the dictionary should be a strict parent.
Twitter erupted in support of the dictionary's legendary clapback.
Apparently, it even caused some life and death situations.
Perhaps it even warranted a mention in the dictionary itself.
As one Twitter user pointed out, we live in an era where the books can burn back.
Things even got political.
Even lexicographer Peter Sokolowski, Merriam-Webster's editor, decided to get involved.
And as for Roth's critique? Sokolowski told BuzzFeed News that Merriam-Webster has heard it all before:
Sorry Roth, but things change: "the only constant about language is change," Sokolowski said.
Oh and in case you were worried about Roth's fragile feelings:
Hopefully Roth can handle the wrath of Merriam-Webster supporters.
...What a time to be alive.