At what point can we dismiss a person's argument due to lack of intelligence evidenced by poor grammar and spelling? Of course, let's assume they are native English speakers so we wouldn't apply this to ESL people.

For me, if you can't differentiate they're, their, there, OR properly use then/than, OR say "could of", "should of", or "would of", then I will apply the "language brainlet" rule and dismiss your argument.

>inb4 but you're not actually addressing the argument, just "nitpicking" spelling and grammar
I'm not just "nitpicking". If you can't use your native language properly, what makes you think you have the intelligence to form any kind of meaningful argument?