At first this was going to be one of those tedious meta-pedantry posts. But then I realized I was about to post one, and remembered meta-pedantry is a thing, so now it's going to be a meta-meta-pedantry post.
Basically, it's surprisingly common to point out, in a fun-loving-meant-to-be-helpful way, someone's minor error of style or grammar, and in the process make a different error of style or grammar yourself.
That, in turn, spawns a slew of "na, na, stones in glass houses, you're not perfect either" posts. Which are tedious, and often dramatically less principal-of-charity laden then the first instance of pedantry.
I'm not sure where this comes from, precisely, it may just be that people reading a pedantic post are less charitable in their reading than than they would be on an on-point substantial post.
Anyway. All that is just preamble to "perhaps you meant 'who'? 'Whom' is functioning as a subject, not direct object in your sentence (the reverse of what's grammatically required)"
Basically, it's surprisingly common to point out, in a fun-loving-meant-to-be-helpful way, someone's minor error of style or grammar, and in the process make a different error of style or grammar yourself.
That, in turn, spawns a slew of "na, na, stones in glass houses, you're not perfect either" posts. Which are tedious, and often dramatically less principal-of-charity laden then the first instance of pedantry.
I'm not sure where this comes from, precisely, it may just be that people reading a pedantic post are less charitable in their reading than than they would be on an on-point substantial post.
Anyway. All that is just preamble to "perhaps you meant 'who'? 'Whom' is functioning as a subject, not direct object in your sentence (the reverse of what's grammatically required)"
;)