Avril Dell vents accordingly<\/p>\n
I just spent way too much billable time looking for ARGUABLY<\/strong> on your Banned for Life list — and it ain’t there! Kindly add ARGUABLY, for those who believe it means conclusively. It don’t. An issue only remains arguable when there are enough legitimate differences to prevent conclusion. That’s what makes something arguable, ya gomers! Where did the arguable blitherers get the idea they could point to one side of an argument as its conclusion?<\/p>\n
I think what they mean to say is that they hope or believe their readers or
\nlisteners agree with their conclusion; or that they’re asserting a fact in
\na wussy way, so they can withdraw it if someone objects. Something like that.
\nbut the “arguable” habit is just too goofy. Slippery and illogical.<\/p>\nRunners up:<\/p>\n
- METEORIC RISE.<\/strong> Huh? As in “blaze briefly on the way down”?<\/li>\n
- NOT UN-whatever. <\/strong>I find this one not unstupid.<\/li>\n
- GOING FORWARD. <\/strong>Used by homo corporatus everywhere, to mean “next”
\nor “in the future” or “from now on”. It can always be lopped off the statement,
\nwith no change in meaning. “This is what we’ll be doing, going forward” can
\nbecome “This is what we’ll be doing”– as the statement has “future” built
\ninto it. When did anything ever occur “going backward”?<\/li>\n- ADDRESS THE ISSUE<\/strong> .Ttell ya what: just deal with it, ok? Just
\ndo it, fix it, trash it, move it, buy it, sell it, fire it, change it, TAKE
\nTHE ACTION. don’t bother addressing the issue; say what you’re going to do
\nand then do it. Period.<\/li>\n- TOUCH BASE. <\/strong>Do NOT touch my base, EVER. I’m serious.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Avril Dell vents accordingly I just spent way too much billable time looking for ARGUABLY on your Banned for Life list — and it ain’t there! Kindly add ARGUABLY, for those who believe it means conclusively. It don’t. An issue … Continue reading