Re: Alternative way to say strongly?

[Scott Holstad <sholstad -at- CORP -dot- EARTHLINK -dot- NET>]

At 04:51 PM 8/18/98 -0400, Linda K. Sherman wrote:

I disagree, ever so slightly.  I think that it's important to qualify our
statements at times, for a variety of reasons, and therefore "should" is a
necessary component of our literary tools.

Then again, I spent four years working for a law firm back in the mid-80s,
so perhaps I've been biased by that, as well as years in academia as
well....  ;)

Scott




>
>You may be overlooking the real problem, however. It's my experience
>that we writers use "should" or "strongly recommends" when what we
>really mean is "must" or "requires". We cop out with "should" and
>"strongly recommends" because we don't want to seem rude or overbearing.
>Unfortunately, readers tend to take these phrases a little too literally
>and see them as offering an acceptable alternative which is, in fact,
>not acceptable at all.

#################################################################
Scott C. Holstad                        email: sholstad -at- earthlink -dot- net
Senior Documentation Specialist phone: 626-296-5067
EarthLink Network                       fax:   626-296-5113
3100 New York Drive                     pager: 213-307-6341
Pasadena, CA  91107                     URL:   http://www.earthlink.net
#################################################################

 From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=