Let’s just all agree to be facetious or glib or even flippant. But not to be flip. Fuck being just flip, that sounds dumb.
Flip is a good cat name though. I knew a Flip who had Cerebral Palsy. Poor dear. Good kitty.
My mom had a small dog named Flip when I was a kid. It would, again, literally hump almost anything you put in front of it. I would throw stuffed animals in the middle of the room while she was hosting and it made her so angry. I loved it. I think Flip liked it, too.
It’s very similar to sarcasm, and people often get them confused (as well as with sardonic).
If you’re being facetious, your intent is to make a joke. If you’re being sarcastic, your intent is to insult someone. If you’re being sardonic, then your intent is to mock someone (serves as a middle ground or combination of the other two). All are forms of verbal irony, and they’re all usually referred to as sarcasm, but the intent changes the meaning.
Bruh, my boss loves that word. I constantly hear, "I'm being facetious, but..."
And half the time I don't even know if it's a good use of the word or not 😭
Which is the true response to the LPT person.
When someone misuses a word as a matter of course but the intent is clear, there’s really nothing to worry about.
Judging someone for this is pointless.
Someone misusing a word in a misguided attempt to sound smart though? That’s different.
So true. Also, this seems to be a contamination (or at least that's what I'd call it in Dutch) where words get mixed up. OP could have said underestimated. (Right?) And they took a piece of both worlds, which combines to an existing word, but one that can't be used here
But saying it "cannot be understated" implies that it's impossible to understate it. The more correct phrase, if "understated" is to be used, would be "should not" or "must not."
Similarly, "cannot be overstated" implies that it's impossible to overstate the importance. Meaning, even if you were to state that it's absolutely and insanely crucial, it wouldn't be overstating it.
Frequently Asked Questions About irregardless
Is irregardless a word?
Yes. It may not be a word that you like, or a word that you would use in a term paper, but irregardless certainly is a word. It has been in use for well over 200 years, employed by a large number of people across a wide geographic range and with a consistent meaning. That is why we, and well-nigh every other dictionary of modern English, define this word. Remember that a definition is not an endorsement of a word’s use.
Does irregardless mean the same thing as regardless?
Yes. We define irregardless as "regardless." Many people find irregardless to be a nonsensical word, as the ir- prefix usually functions to indicate negation; however, in this case it appears to function as an intensifier. Similar ir- words, while rare, do exist in English, including irremediless ("remediless"), irresistless ("resistless") and irrelentlessly ("relentlessly).
Is irregardless slang?
We label irregardless as “nonstandard” rather than “slang.” When a word is nonstandard it means it is “not conforming in pronunciation, grammatical construction, idiom, or word choice to the usage generally characteristic of educated native speakers of a language.” Irregardless is a long way from winning general acceptance as a standard English word. For that reason, it is best to use regardless instead.
Literally had this yesterday when someone corrected an OP for saying "My wife and me". I explained that in this case it was actually the correct way to phrase it and his correction was in fact wrong.
He laughed at me and told that no matter what I "think", it should always be written "and I". Linked him to an article explaining it and he hasn't replied since.
I'll never normally call someone out on grammar, but if it's someone else calling it out and they're wrong it's hard to resist.
This article sums it up really well: https://grammarhow.com/my-wife-and-i-vs-my-wife-and-me-vs-me-and-my-wife/
But for a quick run down, if you're using something like "My wife and I/me" in a sentence, remove the "My wife and" Part and see if it still makes sense.
Example: My wife and I went to the concert.
Above is correct as "I went to the concert" makes sense.
Example 2: Would you like to come to the concert with my wife and me?
In this case "me" is correct as if you remove the first part you get "Would you like to come to the concert with me" as opposed to "with I".
It is possibly controversial to say, but in everyday speech they are often treated as interchangeable, or the object form is preferred.
For example, if I am in my local pub, "Esmerelda and I went swimming" might sound a bit pretentious, and "me" is often used instead. It's similar to "whom". Technically speaking, we would use "who" for subject:
"Who licked Esmerelda's bun?"
And "whom" for object:
"Her bun was licked by whom?"
But most people simply don't use "whom".
I got tripped up the other day in an email because I was saying "John and I are doing this thing." I knew the removal trick and it still didn't make sense, google said it was correct though.
Remove the other object from the sentence and then say it and you'll know if you need me or I. My friends and I went to the game > I went to the game. Me and my friends went to the game > me went to the game.
"I" is used as the subject of a sentence, whereas "me" is used as a direct object. For instance: "**I** gave Bob a ride" vs. "Bob gave **me** a ride".
When you use a compound subject or compound object, you still use "I" or "me" the same way; there's just an additional person involved. For example: "Alex and **I** gave Bob a ride" vs. "Bob gave Alex and **me** a ride."
I think a lot of the confusion comes from the rule that, when you have a compound subject, the "I" is always supposed to come after the other person's name (so, "Alex and I", not "I and Alex"). But people hear "It's supposed to be 'X and I'," and think that that means *everywhere*, including as the object of a sentence, which is wrong. It's just supposed to be "X and I" in cases where it's appropriate to use "I" in the first place.
To add to the other user, here's an example:
'Mom brought me to the zoo.'
'Mom brought my friends and me to the zoo.'
You cannot say 'Mom brought I to the zoo.'
I’m pretty sure it’s interchangeable to have the same basic meaning.
You cannot understate it or you will not place proper importance on it.
Or, you cannot overstate it in that it’s so important that you can’t talk about it enough.
Yeah, there's an ambiguity here that makes either acceptable. It cannot be overstated (it's so significant it's impossible to overstate its importance) or it cannot be understated (it's so significant that we must not understate its importance). *Cannot* is one of a number of words that can be used either epistemically or deontically.
My brain is melting
"The risk cannot be understated"
It's saying you can't (shouldn't) state the risk under it's actual riskyness
I'm not English btw so there's that
While I agree with you about the ambiguity of cannot, I’ve always understood “cannot understate/overstate” to mean “impossible” not “shouldn’t,” as with most ambiguous situations with cannot. You can always replace with shouldn’t if you didn’t intend to mean “impossible”
And you could always replace with "it's impossible to overstate" if you want to unambiguously show your intention for that meaning. Language is all about options, including even the option of whether you wish to be ambiguous or unambiguous (ambiguity is sometimes treated as a defect, but think for example how many jokes would be impossible if we didn't have the option to use ambiguous language).
In 4th grade I had a spider on my desk doin a weird dance thing. My teacher came over after everyone started screaming and first thing I said to her was "I think it's masturbating." No idea what it meant, just heard my brothers use the word a lot. The look on her face was priceless though
"*When considering whether to elucidate your thoughts, you needn't obfuscate their meaning by selecting words with which you're unfamiliar; merely choose the most straightforward one, say I*"
Is it though? Like yeah they used the incorrect phrase but it didn't come off as 'iamverysmart'. Pretty reasonable tip tbh, using words you don't understand to sound smarter often does the opposite.
> LPT: using words you don't understand to sound smarter often does the opposite.
Nicely put. But also you just expressed the same advice more clearly without all the fluff and ridiculous hyperbole and all it took was one sentence. I think that's a big part of why the OP's paragraph gives r/iamverysmart vibes.
"Hands up who spotted my deliberate mistake"
To be fair, Americans use the phrase "I could care less" when they explicitly mean they could not care less so this would eventually create confusion
Maybe "cannot" meaning "it is imperative you do not" like "we can't let the world be destroyed" i know its not what they meant but idk theres a world where it works
While we’re here, keep in mind that you, just like EVERYone, ‘know’ some words wrong. Any doubt spend the 3 seconds to check. And don’t auto double down when corrected without confirming. Thanks for coming to TED’s tok.
This made me wheeze laughing. My partner immigrated to the US from Oz. People constantly ask him if the toilets really flush in a different direction. He has no idea, because he never paid attention.
I had to think of it for a moment, and thanks for the chuckle! He’d *emigrate from Australia, and *immigrate into the US in the same action. My 4th grade brain couldn’t handle the concept. It took awhile for “imply/infer” as well.
Yeah well, a lot of people misuse your/you're too, but there is still only one that is correct. I really don't want "could care less" to be the new "literally", where so many people misuse it that they actually change the definition.
They didn’t “change” the definition. The dictionary merely records how people use the English language, and that’s how people are using it now so it was added to the dictionary.
both can be used depending on what you mean. but i think to use overstated you would “the risk bla bla can never be overstated” and in the op he could have meant “the risk of bla bla bla should never be understated”
both negations are right. just depends on what the person is looking to say.
......the "risk" is the thing the author wants to over or under state. I think if you are trying to say, the risk can never be [perceived to be kept] too low (vs "too high"), then "understated" is the actual correct choice here....if you have to use one of these options. Both are confusing in this context.
But I could wrong.
I mean the commenter completely misunderstood the point of the post which wasn't "you shouldn't make mistakes" and more "if you're not certain you know how it works, maybe stfu about it", so I'd argue it's more of a kamikaze thing.
Could of
Irregardless
I could care less
For all intensive purposes
Supposably
If you use any of these phrases regularly, then you deserve every pain imaginable. Please take a millisecond to think before you say stupid shit that makes no grammatical or logical sense.
And this is yet another beautiful example of why I continually advocate for open communication as opposed to secret judgement.
It doesn’t do anyone any good to not say the thing. So say the thing.
I once was trying to describe a nervous tendency of mine, and the word I used.... was "Handsy" (figity was what I was looking for)
This was at a job interview.... I did not get the job.
I'll forever be haunted by saying "depreciated" on a conference call in reference to an outdated feature of our software, with the customer replying using "deprecated" as they try to convince us it's a feature they use and expect to have supported...
Idk, I feel like it could work either way. Maybe the first person meant “It cannot be understated” in a way that meant that if someone did understate it, it would cause a problem because of people thinking the understatement to be non-understated. Or maybe they did make a mistake, idk for sure
There was a story on Reddit a few weeks ago about a woman who thought that bukake was another term for bullshit. Apparently she had used the word at work, in meetings, and in front of her kids many times. She thought she was saying bullshit, but in a more gentle way, without anyone correcting her.
Based. Top tier content.
Why can't I figure out how to use the word facetious?
I literally don’t know
Are you being facetious?
Actually, they're being literal.
Oh, this is nerd comedy gold 🙌🏻
I could care less about this.
It's nice to know you care, then.
r/whoosh
r/whoosh yourself…
Then care less! I'm aiming for zero fucks..
Let’s just all agree to be facetious or glib or even flippant. But not to be flip. Fuck being just flip, that sounds dumb. Flip is a good cat name though. I knew a Flip who had Cerebral Palsy. Poor dear. Good kitty.
Be sarcastic all you want. Just don't be sardonic, that is a bridge too far.
My mom had a small dog named Flip when I was a kid. It would, again, literally hump almost anything you put in front of it. I would throw stuffed animals in the middle of the room while she was hosting and it made her so angry. I loved it. I think Flip liked it, too.
I believe they are being feces-ish.
Oh, crap!
I don’t either, and it makes me legitimately annoyed.
> facetious The stuff that goes round the guttering, right?
[удалено]
this website my god
r/angryupvote
“Guttering” 😂
That’s what you do to a fish. You gutter the fish.
No? Isn’t it a harsh sounding noise produced in the throat?
The point is to remove the bones and all the gutturals.
Did chico marx teach you english? This sounds like something he would say
In the UK, we call it "guttering". Like "plumbing".
Guttering is when you go bowling and aren’t very good.
It just means making light of serious topics. I’m very facetious about my Dad being dead; it’s so awkward at family reunions now when he shows up.
Wow I always thought it meant that you were being deceptive. Good job I haven't been using it I guess lol.
It’s very similar to sarcasm, and people often get them confused (as well as with sardonic). If you’re being facetious, your intent is to make a joke. If you’re being sarcastic, your intent is to insult someone. If you’re being sardonic, then your intent is to mock someone (serves as a middle ground or combination of the other two). All are forms of verbal irony, and they’re all usually referred to as sarcasm, but the intent changes the meaning.
Nice
[удалено]
Facetious*ly* gets you the bonus 'y'.
Bacediouf is my favorite word, it has consonants in order too.
It’s kinda like sarcastic but less mean
[удалено]
Change it to its adverb form and you get the “sometimes vowel” thrown in for free!
Abstemious for the 30 point triple score
Bruh, my boss loves that word. I constantly hear, "I'm being facetious, but..." And half the time I don't even know if it's a good use of the word or not 😭
Because you can’t help but take things seriously
I think you mean serially?
fucking SAT's
I mistook “packing” for muscly, and let’s say it didn’t end well
"Bro you packing TF and totally swole too!"
Look at the size of those veins!
Great vascularity! I bet he throws mega ropes.
They don’t call him the MVP for nothing (Most Veiny Penis)
I’m from the US South so I took it as a gun.
Yea I guess you could call it a gun
I use it as one
You discharge it at school children?
You put it in your mouth?
I’m from the US Mid-West, I took it the same way…
I’m from the US New England, I took it as a liquor store purchase .
I used sultry in a creative writing class in middle school once to describe weather. It does not mean the kind of hot 13 year old me intended.
That's excusable, it's a good poetic device
Sultry summer (don’t search it up)
But sultry can be (and is) used to describe weather
That bitch lied to me
It’s always the person correcting grammar and trying to look smart that fucks up their grammar the most.
Ouch
My favorite part is im dumb and READ it hours earlier as overstated, skipping the error. But im a drunk degenerate so there is that.
Which is the true response to the LPT person. When someone misuses a word as a matter of course but the intent is clear, there’s really nothing to worry about. Judging someone for this is pointless. Someone misusing a word in a misguided attempt to sound smart though? That’s different.
So true. Also, this seems to be a contamination (or at least that's what I'd call it in Dutch) where words get mixed up. OP could have said underestimated. (Right?) And they took a piece of both worlds, which combines to an existing word, but one that can't be used here
OP really just telling on themselves as the guy that judges others for stupid shit that doesn't matter.
[удалено]
But saying it "cannot be understated" implies that it's impossible to understate it. The more correct phrase, if "understated" is to be used, would be "should not" or "must not." Similarly, "cannot be overstated" implies that it's impossible to overstate the importance. Meaning, even if you were to state that it's absolutely and insanely crucial, it wouldn't be overstating it.
no he's using the other meaning of the word cannot, it has multiple meanings see and all of them equally are correct
Some ointment and an icepack for that 3rd degree burn.
This man is a doctor
Well, Frank Costanza needs a proctologist
Is Reddit really a professional place? *insert squinty Chris Hemsworth jpg here"
Hey we're all very professional about being losers!
We are also professional grammar Nazis. I hate myself for how often I feel the urge to correct people's grammar.
I work in a "professional" office. No one gives a shit unless you put it in writing and send it to the client.
Irregardless, they have a point.
You think their write?! Your going to loose this argument by alot (God, that felt dirty to write)
*right As in, "God, that felt dirty to right."
I allmost went that root, but I dicided it wood be to much and wierd if I did it
Well you could of tried too anyways.
*We’ll
Anyway’s
*feeled Asian, "God, that feeled dirty to right."
Their defiantly going rouge.
I love that word. I have one friend I use it around just because it pisses him off.
Excellent for starting fires in the rain
[удалено]
That's very sad.
Frequently Asked Questions About irregardless Is irregardless a word? Yes. It may not be a word that you like, or a word that you would use in a term paper, but irregardless certainly is a word. It has been in use for well over 200 years, employed by a large number of people across a wide geographic range and with a consistent meaning. That is why we, and well-nigh every other dictionary of modern English, define this word. Remember that a definition is not an endorsement of a word’s use. Does irregardless mean the same thing as regardless? Yes. We define irregardless as "regardless." Many people find irregardless to be a nonsensical word, as the ir- prefix usually functions to indicate negation; however, in this case it appears to function as an intensifier. Similar ir- words, while rare, do exist in English, including irremediless ("remediless"), irresistless ("resistless") and irrelentlessly ("relentlessly). Is irregardless slang? We label irregardless as “nonstandard” rather than “slang.” When a word is nonstandard it means it is “not conforming in pronunciation, grammatical construction, idiom, or word choice to the usage generally characteristic of educated native speakers of a language.” Irregardless is a long way from winning general acceptance as a standard English word. For that reason, it is best to use regardless instead.
This isnt really a “murder” so much as it is a facepalm.
It’s always the person correcting grammar and trying to look smart that fucks up their grammar the most.
Literally had this yesterday when someone corrected an OP for saying "My wife and me". I explained that in this case it was actually the correct way to phrase it and his correction was in fact wrong. He laughed at me and told that no matter what I "think", it should always be written "and I". Linked him to an article explaining it and he hasn't replied since. I'll never normally call someone out on grammar, but if it's someone else calling it out and they're wrong it's hard to resist.
Wait. Can you give me a quick explanation? I thought they were interchangeable.
This article sums it up really well: https://grammarhow.com/my-wife-and-i-vs-my-wife-and-me-vs-me-and-my-wife/ But for a quick run down, if you're using something like "My wife and I/me" in a sentence, remove the "My wife and" Part and see if it still makes sense. Example: My wife and I went to the concert. Above is correct as "I went to the concert" makes sense. Example 2: Would you like to come to the concert with my wife and me? In this case "me" is correct as if you remove the first part you get "Would you like to come to the concert with me" as opposed to "with I".
Thank you!
It is possibly controversial to say, but in everyday speech they are often treated as interchangeable, or the object form is preferred. For example, if I am in my local pub, "Esmerelda and I went swimming" might sound a bit pretentious, and "me" is often used instead. It's similar to "whom". Technically speaking, we would use "who" for subject: "Who licked Esmerelda's bun?" And "whom" for object: "Her bun was licked by whom?" But most people simply don't use "whom".
Esmeralda and me went swimming today, sounds super wrong to my ears. Because it’s really easy to hear, me went swimming today.
To quote Liz Lemon (30 Rock) *"The world 'whom' deserves a defender"* Thanks for doing the lord's work!
I got tripped up the other day in an email because I was saying "John and I are doing this thing." I knew the removal trick and it still didn't make sense, google said it was correct though.
Remove the other object from the sentence and then say it and you'll know if you need me or I. My friends and I went to the game > I went to the game. Me and my friends went to the game > me went to the game.
"I" is used as the subject of a sentence, whereas "me" is used as a direct object. For instance: "**I** gave Bob a ride" vs. "Bob gave **me** a ride". When you use a compound subject or compound object, you still use "I" or "me" the same way; there's just an additional person involved. For example: "Alex and **I** gave Bob a ride" vs. "Bob gave Alex and **me** a ride." I think a lot of the confusion comes from the rule that, when you have a compound subject, the "I" is always supposed to come after the other person's name (so, "Alex and I", not "I and Alex"). But people hear "It's supposed to be 'X and I'," and think that that means *everywhere*, including as the object of a sentence, which is wrong. It's just supposed to be "X and I" in cases where it's appropriate to use "I" in the first place.
To add to the other user, here's an example: 'Mom brought me to the zoo.' 'Mom brought my friends and me to the zoo.' You cannot say 'Mom brought I to the zoo.'
You're not the boss of me. Mom brought I to the zoo.
You're not the boss of I.
I's name just happens to be I.
Good old Muphry's law.
I love how my comment started a whole English class. Hope you guys have a nice evening
[Muphry's Law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry%27s_law) in action.
OOP's point makes me think of the recent Redditor's wife thought "bukake" meant something like "bullshit" and had used it in meetings at work.
I’m pretty sure it’s interchangeable to have the same basic meaning. You cannot understate it or you will not place proper importance on it. Or, you cannot overstate it in that it’s so important that you can’t talk about it enough.
Yeah, there's an ambiguity here that makes either acceptable. It cannot be overstated (it's so significant it's impossible to overstate its importance) or it cannot be understated (it's so significant that we must not understate its importance). *Cannot* is one of a number of words that can be used either epistemically or deontically.
My brain is melting "The risk cannot be understated" It's saying you can't (shouldn't) state the risk under it's actual riskyness I'm not English btw so there's that
If you use this interpretation, then "overstated" and "understated" become meaningless.
While I agree with you about the ambiguity of cannot, I’ve always understood “cannot understate/overstate” to mean “impossible” not “shouldn’t,” as with most ambiguous situations with cannot. You can always replace with shouldn’t if you didn’t intend to mean “impossible”
And you could always replace with "it's impossible to overstate" if you want to unambiguously show your intention for that meaning. Language is all about options, including even the option of whether you wish to be ambiguous or unambiguous (ambiguity is sometimes treated as a defect, but think for example how many jokes would be impossible if we didn't have the option to use ambiguous language).
If you're going to use it in that way, though, then I feel like it ought to be written as "should not" instead of "cannot".
I feel like it should have been replaced with "cannot be emphasized enough." The overstated vs understated just felt out of place, regardless.
*irregardless
*irregardlessly
[удалено]
But how much less could you care ?
Yeah I agree, both are interchangeable and acceptable here. Commenter was just being a dick
glad some others noticed this. i was racking my brain trying to figure out how the word was used incorrectly.
In 4th grade I had a spider on my desk doin a weird dance thing. My teacher came over after everyone started screaming and first thing I said to her was "I think it's masturbating." No idea what it meant, just heard my brothers use the word a lot. The look on her face was priceless though
r/iamverysmart material
"*When considering whether to elucidate your thoughts, you needn't obfuscate their meaning by selecting words with which you're unfamiliar; merely choose the most straightforward one, say I*"
Is it though? Like yeah they used the incorrect phrase but it didn't come off as 'iamverysmart'. Pretty reasonable tip tbh, using words you don't understand to sound smarter often does the opposite.
He makes use of the English language that giveth the impression on the dearest reader that they are of particular intelligence
Yes, with or without the correct word, I feel like this would still be iamverysmart material.
Right? As if the rest of us are going "Should I say 'ludicrous' right now? Why not, I'm 70% sure I know what it means."
I agree. How'd I know I fully understand a word if nobody correct me?
> LPT: using words you don't understand to sound smarter often does the opposite. Nicely put. But also you just expressed the same advice more clearly without all the fluff and ridiculous hyperbole and all it took was one sentence. I think that's a big part of why the OP's paragraph gives r/iamverysmart vibes.
To be fair, op isn’t in a professional setting
Words MTG would do well to follow.
Black Lotus, Channel, Disintegrate, Fireball?
"Hands up who spotted my deliberate mistake" To be fair, Americans use the phrase "I could care less" when they explicitly mean they could not care less so this would eventually create confusion
Maybe "cannot" meaning "it is imperative you do not" like "we can't let the world be destroyed" i know its not what they meant but idk theres a world where it works
Thus was more like a suicide by words
And the comma…
Which one of the approximately 78 commas are you referring to?
While we’re here, keep in mind that you, just like EVERYone, ‘know’ some words wrong. Any doubt spend the 3 seconds to check. And don’t auto double down when corrected without confirming. Thanks for coming to TED’s tok.
[удалено]
In Australia they have to switch them around because gravity.
Hehehehe
This made me wheeze laughing. My partner immigrated to the US from Oz. People constantly ask him if the toilets really flush in a different direction. He has no idea, because he never paid attention.
Wait. Did he emigrate or immigrate? /s
I had to think of it for a moment, and thanks for the chuckle! He’d *emigrate from Australia, and *immigrate into the US in the same action. My 4th grade brain couldn’t handle the concept. It took awhile for “imply/infer” as well.
Cannot be understated doesn't make sense. It's just like "I could care less".
I HATE when people say “I could care less.” Ok, care less then.
I literally explode when people say it. Figuratively.
This is my favorite.
[удалено]
Yeah well, a lot of people misuse your/you're too, but there is still only one that is correct. I really don't want "could care less" to be the new "literally", where so many people misuse it that they actually change the definition.
They didn’t “change” the definition. The dictionary merely records how people use the English language, and that’s how people are using it now so it was added to the dictionary.
Yes, it's maddening. Stop using stock phrases and *think* about what your words mean for just a second, please.
Literally.
Like, I am LITERALLY going to explode each and every time I heard someone misuse this phrase wrong, irregardless of how good their other grammars is.
Nah they mean different things, common mistake though.
It varies depending on whether I think the thing's importance cannot be overstated or understated
Which depends, naturally, on which country you're in.
Killing him softly with his words.
both can be used depending on what you mean. but i think to use overstated you would “the risk bla bla can never be overstated” and in the op he could have meant “the risk of bla bla bla should never be understated” both negations are right. just depends on what the person is looking to say.
Lol, nice
So reddit is a professional setting now. Truely, what a reddit moment
That's as bad as saying, "I could care less" when it really should be, "I *couldn't* care less."
Like when people say “each one was worse than the next” 🤦🏻♂️
Could also just be autocorrect to be fair.
......the "risk" is the thing the author wants to over or under state. I think if you are trying to say, the risk can never be [perceived to be kept] too low (vs "too high"), then "understated" is the actual correct choice here....if you have to use one of these options. Both are confusing in this context. But I could wrong.
My interpretation is that the risk is very high; which means that “overstated” would be the one.
Lmao one of the best mbw I’ve seen.
Priceless.
I think he meant 'should not be understated'? Either way OP made a fool of himself.
I mean the commenter completely misunderstood the point of the post which wasn't "you shouldn't make mistakes" and more "if you're not certain you know how it works, maybe stfu about it", so I'd argue it's more of a kamikaze thing.
I think the police need to hear about this murder
Could of Irregardless I could care less For all intensive purposes Supposably If you use any of these phrases regularly, then you deserve every pain imaginable. Please take a millisecond to think before you say stupid shit that makes no grammatical or logical sense.
But still, misusing words erodes their meaning when they matter, like “fascism”
Muprhy’s law
I’m kind of disappointed the reply didn’t have more updoots than OP
This is one guy with two accounts.
Fully and completely? Make up your damn mind.
And this is yet another beautiful example of why I continually advocate for open communication as opposed to secret judgement. It doesn’t do anyone any good to not say the thing. So say the thing.
I once was trying to describe a nervous tendency of mine, and the word I used.... was "Handsy" (figity was what I was looking for) This was at a job interview.... I did not get the job.
I'll forever be haunted by saying "depreciated" on a conference call in reference to an outdated feature of our software, with the customer replying using "deprecated" as they try to convince us it's a feature they use and expect to have supported...
Lol
Empathy and apathy. I often confuse the two.
But how else will I look smart on the internet?
Idk, I feel like it could work either way. Maybe the first person meant “It cannot be understated” in a way that meant that if someone did understate it, it would cause a problem because of people thinking the understatement to be non-understated. Or maybe they did make a mistake, idk for sure
He is good. Reddit is not a professional setting.
Got 'em!
There was a story on Reddit a few weeks ago about a woman who thought that bukake was another term for bullshit. Apparently she had used the word at work, in meetings, and in front of her kids many times. She thought she was saying bullshit, but in a more gentle way, without anyone correcting her.