RE: POLL: A question of rhetoric (not a rhetorical question)

Subject: RE: POLL: A question of rhetoric (not a rhetorical question)
From: "Pete Sanborn" <psanborn2 -at- earthlink -dot- net>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 16:36:58 -0500

Roy Jacobsen writes:
"You can assign at item to only one group."

Or, "An item may be assigned to only one group" to make it a neutral
statement. Typically, the positive approach is preferred as opposed to the
negative because as soon as someone is told what they CAN'T do, that's the
first thing they try. When the statement is put in a positive context, as
in Mr. Jacobsen's statement above, people tend to interpret it as giving
them permission to place an item in only one group as opposed to telling
them that they can't put in aitem in more than one group.

It's silly, but it's all in the wrist!

:-)

Regards,
Pete Sanborn


-----Original Message-----
From: bounce-techwr-l-81537 -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
[mailto:bounce-techwr-l-81537 -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com]On Behalf Of Roy
Jacobsen
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 4:30 PM
To: TECHWR-L
Subject: POLL: A question of rhetoric (not a rhetorical question)


I'm satisfying my curiosity here. When discussing the limitations (as
opposed to the capabilities) of a product, do you favor positive
phrasing (e.g. "You can assign at item to only one group.") or negative
(e.g. "You can't assign an item to more than one group.")?

In thecontext of discussing the limitations of a product, which conveys
the information most clearly and forcefully?


Roy M. Jacobsen
Senior Editor, Documentation
Microsoft Great Plains Business Solutions
One Lonetree Road
Fargo, ND 58104-3911
USA
rjacobse -at- microsoft -dot- com

A fool and his money are soon partying.




^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Be a published author! iUniverse gives you: a high-quality paperback, a
custom cover design, and distribution to 25,00 retailers. Join our almost
10,000 published authors today. http://www.iuniverse.com/media/techwr

Have you looked at the new content on TECHWR-L lately?
See http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ and check it out.

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.


References:
POLL: A question of rhetoric (not a rhetorical question): From: Roy Jacobsen

Previous by Author: RE: You can't go home again
Next by Author: RE: POLL: A question of rhetoric (not a rhetorical question)
Previous by Thread: POLL: A question of rhetoric (not a rhetorical question)
Next by Thread: Re: POLL: A question of rhetoric (not a rhetorical question)


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:


Sponsored Ads