Last week at Seven Cycles I was discussing, with a visitor, the state of marketing in the bike industry. Not just marketing to the public--primarily through bike magazines--but also, and more important, the marketing communications to retailers and the industry proper. Some of the work I've seen this season--since Interbike--has been hard to believe. There doesn't seem to be much of a sense of dynamics to marketing recently. It's all hollering-neon-sledgehammers, all the time. It all starts to sound and look the same.
A lot of the marketing I'm talking about is not intended for the public so I'm not going to post any of it. Suffice to say that it's all beginning to remind me of a situation that's occurred in the music industry: the Loudness Wars. Ladyfingerexplains:
That's a doozy. If the person does, 'not disagree', doesn't that person agree? Or, apparently, the person does disagree. Why use an expression that is purposefully meaningless, self contradictory, and downright confusing?
The statement can have only one of three meanings:
Agree with some parts and disagree with other parts of the presenter's view
A person cannot 'kind of agree'. The speaker either does or doesn't agree. If the person agrees with some of what you said and disagrees with other elements, that is not "not disagree" it is agreeing with some elements and not with others.
If a person agrees with you and is using this expression, the speaker is either: