On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 12:53 AM, Ingrid Srinath <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 2 Apr 2013, at 23:20, Deepa Mohan <[email protected]> wrote: > >> - *OTOH, the reductionist overhead:revenue ratio as a metric of >>> 'deservingness' ..... to play the >>> ratio game, as it is of the need for a one-size-fits-all comparator* >> >> >> Sorry...but that acronym, those words....I'm afraid this is a good example >> of the kind of prose that will switch my attention off. For this passage >> (or failage) above, I have to remember "On The Other Hand". I have to think >> of what "reductionist" means. Figure out what overhead revenue ration is. >> What "metric of deservingness" is...what a "comparator" is...all this >> before trying to follow the actual argument! >> >> We do seem to forget how to keep our words simple. >> >> >> Deepa. > > Apologies, Deepa.
We all do this. I often catch myself talking about a 'resource', 'headcount' or an FTE when I should just say person. These are particularly egregious in my book because these de-humanizing words are the first step of the common software industry practice of converting people into interchangeable square pegs that are then hammered into round holes. -- b
