I read several blogs that use British English, including this OP's blog. Some of my favourite blogs in my RSS reader are British English blogs, or at least they use British English spellings and grammar. I find their use of the English language very charming and funny in a unique way.

It surprises me that anyone would feel entitled to ask a blogger to change the variety of English they use. American English is only one of many forms of English. The world is richer for its many varieties of English, and languages, and that diversity makes it more interesting, not less.

The way Americans speak and write, when compared to actual English, is terrible. No structure, wrong and misplaced punctuation, and lax grammar (if any). Speaking is even worse: a diarrhea of filler words, like 'like', 'I mean', and 'you know'. Practically no living American knows neither the word 'whom' nor when to use it. It's as if grammatical casing had been declared unconstitutional. If you ask me, it's more a speech impediment than any other classification.

But the thing is that every one (at least those below a certain age) speaks like this these days, thanks to the non-stop American content online. So it's basically normalized. This is why it's on my publish wish list that someone develops an AI that can filter out the American-ness, thereby Making English Great Again (MEGA).

Further, I think that institutions (those pertaining to education, at least) elsewhere in the world should issue PSA about too much exposure to American content--both written and spoken--and offer or mandate detox sessions.

Perhaps the only American to whom (there it is!) I can bear listening, is Steven Pinker.

Certain cultures teach that diversity is a bad thing to be feared and extinguished. Diversity is only a good thing when your mind has been poisoned by "education" and "experience".

It requires an open mind to see diverse experiences as a good thing, and certain cultures think having citizens with open minds is an unprofitable way to run a society.

Right. As a Brit I am entitled to think we speak the best version (because we do; ISE is a close second) but I am not entitled to believe everyone else's is wrong, because that is ahistorical. They have diverged repeatedly and thus ours is one of the divergences.

Much of British English was standardised long after several waves of the US settlers left our shores, so US english has some traits of pre-standardised English dialects, and ours is different again.

It's equally silly when some Americans claim their English is closer to the "true" English as a result, because, again, there was really no standardised "true" English when they left.

Along with some simplifications and some things reintroduced from german settlers, it has some traits of older English that the British abandoned in our own simplification of the language.

Is ours the best? Of course it bloody is :-) But is it "true" English? No more than anyone else's. That is the enormous power of English.

I agree in general, but there's one exception: use of the word 'tabled'. This means roughly the opposite in British and US English, and there's often insufficient surrounding context to alert the reader to their error.

(OTOH I don't think you should suppress 'false friends' like biscuits, pants etc.)

Imagine someone wrote a blog in some obscure language that few people speak. If you happen to know that language, you'd think wow this is great. If you don't happen to know that language, you'd just think it's a shame. This is the same thing, just to a lesser degree. Some people might be interested in putting in the effort to learn a bunch of foreign cultural references, but not everyone.