Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote

I think its the weird way of using old words.
Our vision is that this will inform our policies toward carbon
neutrality.
Ie lots of word to say, lets see if we can do it on the cheap, but I also
get annoyed by politicians dressing up things as something else.
We were at that time blind to this.

Instead of, I cocked it up cos I never read the memo, and in any case why
is blind used in that context? Blind is simply in the lack of sight. I
mean blind drunk, Blind faith, blind alley??

Those terms are useful. What other term would you use that is better ?

I also get annoyed with a gradual change to the names of organisations for
blind people calling themselves. Vision Australia, or London Vision, or
Vision foundation etc, Vision loss is fine, but these organisations sound
like some kind of hippy think tank, not a charity to help blind people,
what is wrong with blind, or vision loss or partially sighted??

Too long.

You get the same problem with disabled, the worst of the fools
don’t like to admit that they are disabled and use other silly terms.

LGT* is even worse, I cant even get google to show me the latest version.

Its obvious why they do it by result is stupid.

Nothing, its yet another buzz word in the war for being noticed, but now
everyone has done it they all sound the same again!

The word Overarching seems to have been created in the last 15 years or
so. Strange nebulous word.

My mission statement is to restore plain speaking...

The death squad has its orders...

"Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news
Tap instead of click.
App instead of program.
Fewer instead of less (even though more has no equivalent).
Slowed up instead of slowed down (slow is less speed, so must be down).
People who write computer programs that say "hello world" and nothing
else - clearly that program doesn't have the intelligence to say hello.
Bothering to distinguish between burned and burnt.
Forward instead of forwards.