On 21/09/2018 04:05, Mark Rousell wrote:
Although "folks" has nothing to do with industry standard terminology of any sort, I mentioned as an aside that it is commonly seen as a rather annoying and jarring phrase where I am. I said this merely to note it as an aside. I'd never actually complain about it, no matter how annoying I might find it. The reason I would not complain about it is because I am not so selfish or self-centred as to expect other people to change their culture to suit me. As an adult, I accept that I can adapt to work with their culture (if I work within it, join it, live with it or communicate with it), even if some of their phraseology might privately annoy me. In the parallel context of industry terminology, for a newcomer to a particular industry to get upset over certain well established industry standard terms is making a mistake: They are making the mistake of thinking that it's all about them when, in fact, the usage of the terms that bother them (if any) are nothing whatsoever to do with them (just as the use of "folks" would not be aimed at me)! The industry terms are entirely neutral terms, used only because they have clearly understood meaning in that industry. Joining the industry means, amongst other things, learning the terminology and learning not to take it personally when it is in reality entirely non-personal. Industry terminology really is just neutral, non-harmful communication. Learning it is part of education and adaptation as an adult. In short, no one should expect the mass of people to adapt to you just because it's you; try instead to adapt to the already existing standards that everyone else has been able to adapt to, standards that are not in any way whatsoever shutting you out (since any words you don't like are not aimed at you at all) and which are fully inclusive to everyone involved in the industry, both old and new, not just you. -- Mark Rousell |
