Where I worked the emphasis was on clear communication. It was a safety issue. I’d imagine in the financial world, they’re all about plausible deniability and passing the buck.
In that passive voice construction, there’s still agency: the “by client X” tells the reader who’s doing the verb. @Novelty_Bobble is facing criticism because his constructions–some of which are technically not passive voice–keep obscuring agency. He asks us to opine on whether something is “permissible,” but refuses to tell us who is giving or withholding permission. It’s terrible writing.
I love the sound of people scrabbling desperately to salvage a shred of credibilty.
Not a single second taken to consider whether the concept that I talked about might be relevant here whilst providing example after example of it in action.
Do you often hear phantom sounds like that in your head?
I went into this thread with no opinion of you whatsoever, but now I’m pretty convinced you’re awful based solely on our interactions. You’re the one with no credibility. So much of your crap is either something you coyly allude to but won’t provide, or something easily falsified. No wonder you have a Pit thread so long.
In much the same way that Thelonious Monk loved the sound of jazz.
No one could figure out what you’re trying to say, you idiot. And it’s not because WE are all idiots.
I don’t believe a word of your supposed neutrality, I certainly don’t think it would have lasted a second past the point you realised I don’t necessarily think exactly the way you do.
You just fall in line with the others and filter everything I post through a biased and bad faith filter. You are predisposed and motivated to find fault with whatever I write. You are incapable of doing otherwise.
Even the idiotic google search thing for gods sake. You perform gymnastics to find fault. Even though everything I said about what I searched for, why, and what I found was true.
If you think you are better than that, why not give what I said about “the curse of knowledge” a try on for size. Might it reasonably apply in the case of the google search?
It is somewhat ironic because, relating to the sort of writing I do, a lot of the specific knowledge to be imparted can only be conveyed with any certainty and repeatability by taking that concept into account.
You note how it was assumed that “88” was the search term anyone would use? Wrong.
You also see how people helpfully forget that I had already been misdirected about what I was looking for?
You how the assumption is made that the top results from wiki paraphrased in the seach results must surely lead someone to click into it and search deeper. Sure, if you also assume that people must know that what they are looking for is in there somewhere.
If you know you are looking for a specific outcome then it is incredibly easy to fool yourself into thinking others cannot possibly miss it. This is an absolute textbook example.
And I predict you will brush this off as well.
You have the most highly polished mirror I have ever seen on a messageboard.
Haha! Perfect. The whole first few paragraphs is like he’s talking to himself.
I get along pretty well with a number of people on this board who have very different opinions than I do. I’ve even been a conservative for most of my time on this board. I clash with people now and then but for the most part those disagreements get resolved as we come to an understanding.
I was flat out saying “fuck you” to people in a recent Pit thread who offended me, but we worked it out. That happens between people who have different strong opinions but mean well and are open-minded.
You, on the other hand, spout bullshit and just call me a liar based on nothing but the fact that I eventually drew a negative conclusion about you.
NB, you are a bad member of this community and I look forward to the day when you’re gone.
Wait, what did you search for???
You might at least have the decency to read my explanation of what I did. It is all there in black and white.
Who’s Thelonious Monk? I tried to google it, but couldn’t be arsed to actually clink on any of the links. Are you absolutely sure that he or she loved the sound of jazz? Or should I simply take your word for it, not having any way to find out who Thelonious Monk is after you coyly alluded to them but refused to specify why they might love the sound of jazz?
Oh, sorry, didn’t realize I needed to commit your every word to memory. I’ll do better next time, promise!
I’ve said clearly that I do not care what your opinion of me is. The opinion of someone who interacts in such bad faith is worthless.
I Googled it and got something about a TV show and a character class in D&D . . . whatever that is.
No-one is asking you to remember, just perhaps read the relevant posts in the thread.
I’ll requote it if you want me to but it wasn’t that long ago and it wasn’t obscure. Post 203 if you are interested
And now you understand how everyone else in this thread feels about you.
Oh man, that’s a lot of scrolling you’re expecting me to do just to find the information I’m looking for…
That really doesn’t work in the way you think it does but I suppose a weak attempt at sarcasm is easier than an honest review of what actually happened.