The inevitable happened. The new IS guy posted a link on FB to his latest unreadable, inane article and someone dared to state the obvious i.e. the article is badly-written to the point of being incomprehensible. I voiced my agreement and have been banished from the IS FB page. None of this 1 month ban like that part-time rebel Woof received - my ban is permanent.

The new guy did mention to me that he is thriving as head of IS and therefore he is better off ignoring my advice. Which begs the question: how long can he pull off editing IS when he knows next to nothing about the topic, can't write and is adamant that he doesn't want to change either of those facts? Indefinitely perhaps; stranger things have happened and apparently the site is getting lots of hits.

Much as Chens had his faults, to be fair he can write coherently (I still wince at 'quotidian khakis', but he was readable) and he did, eventually, learn what ivy clothing means. Even disregarding professionalism and respect for ivy clothing, it's commercial common sense. Yet the new guy can't see it.

Last edited by Yuca (2021-10-18 13:11:55)

Justice for the Talk Ivy Two.

If it’s of any reassurance Yuca, not only are you in excellent company, but my life has continued quite satisfactorily since being banned from the IS FB page.

I'm fairly sure anyone on Facebook is not thriving.

Normally when I give constructive criticism to someone I try to do it tactfully. That way they're more likely to take notice. But when someone is convinced of their own expertise then I just want to prick their pomposity. In his case he's very pompous and conceited, and despite his self-appointed expert status he really hasn't a clue - about ivy or anything related to style. Even by my mundane standards, he's dresses pretty badly. Add to that that his way of writing is painful to read, so I must admit my usual tact was not forthcoming when I commented on his recent attempt at journalism.

Last edited by Yuca (2021-10-18 19:33:30)