On 21/04/2020, at 8:07 AM, Carsten Bormann < cabo@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Jay, On 2020-04-20, at 21:42, Jay Daley < jay@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
The original note said "Given the current conditions in Spain and around the world, the framework is based on the assumption that these conditions would have to significantly improve for the in-person meeting to be held." and I would really like to know if that was not explicit enough or if it was lost in the volume of communication?
How you read this sentence depends a lot on what TV network you are watching.
I don’t agree at all. Far simpler and far more productive to read something for what it actually says than what you think it might be hinting at.
Of course the conditions will "significantly improve", won’t they?
I don’t know, neither does anyone else. We all appear to agree the probability of significant improvement is very low.
(Yes, from the PoV of a reasonably well-informed New Zealander or German, your sentence probably was perfectly clear; I just happen to be exposed to a large population of people right now even in Germany that have wildly different receptions of what the public discussion is telling us. I’m trying to say that clarity helps here; don’t leave too much to the inference of the reader.)
As noted, I disagree - I think that sentence was perfectly clear.
Jay
|
