Sweat the Small Stuff

I hate to sound like a school marm. I do. I'm a fun person. And I'm not a stickler in life. If my dinner order is pretty hot but not piping hot, I don't send it back. If someone cuts me off in traffic, I give them the benefit. If there's sand on my sheets from the beach, I shake it out and sweep up the next day. Anyone who knows me knows that I am in fact diplomatic to a fault. Very little upsets me, very little irks me.

But lately unproofread scripts are driving me nuts. Maybe it's because I'm viewing things through a new lens - that of a possible manager. See - even now, I can't quite commit by using a stronger, more declarative statement. Okay let's just say I'm strongly toying with the idea to the point that I have taken on one client and am mildly, curiously looking for more. Maybe. If I read a great script.

But in the day to day I'm still the mama of The Script Department. And in that capacity, I read at least one script daily. And I read pretty fast. I like to settle down with a cup of coffee and immerse myself in a script without interruptions. I don't sit near my computer, I don't answer the phone. I give each script my full attention.

I always have a pen nearby, to circle problems or leave notes for myself. The little things - spelling, grammar, logic questions, etc., I note directly on that particular page. The big problems I scribble on the title page. So I might have Big Notes that say: scene work. character arcs. structure. soft premise.

Lately, I have been circling a whole lot of little problems on pages. Dialogue that does not end with a punctuation mark. Errant commas. Characters names all-capped throughout the script or not done at all. Missing ages for characters. Misspells, malaprops. Sheek for chic, peer for pier, your for you're, to for too.

And every time I have to stop reading to circle those problems, my read is interrupted. I am taken out of the story for a nanosecond. And that irks me. Because I need to be in the flow of the story. And if I pause for one nanosecond for every error but I do that six times on almost every page - pretty soon my focus on the story itself starts to fade.

Production company readers slam the writer for these types of sloppy, lazy errors. I note the problem to a client but of course, I am not about slamming, just knuckle rapping. Why my clientele feels a good proofread is not necessary when sending to me, I don't know. I think they figure that they'll be rewriting the script anyway, since they're getting notes so the small stuff doesn't matter. But it does. It lowers my estimation of the writer - just a tiny bit. And, more importantly, it distracts me from the story. If a writer keeps making the same punctuation mistakes over and over, you'd think you could stop circling them and just make one overall comment that they need to proofread. That would do the trick. But - I can't help but circle them. Every time I read a your for you're I cringe. It's a tick that most readers have. It bugs us. It bugs us A LOT.

When your script is read, you really want the reader to be totally focused on your story and your characters. Proofreading isn't for perfectionists or bookish types, it's a gateway to a smooth read. How valuable are receiving notes that are mini-lessons in contractions, comma usage or proper punctuation? Aren't you more interested in receiving notes about character arc, dialogue and structure? Isn't that the top priority? It is for me, as a story analyst. But proper grammar, punctuation and spelling are the delivery system for your story.

Imagine watching a television show and every 3 seconds, you see something wrong - a prop that keeps switching, a costume change, a stumble over dialogue. Pretty soon, that's all you see - not the story itself. And imagine the producers of the show saying - yeah, yeah, ignore those details, just get into the story, man!

The details need to be right in order for the story to shine. Why, just last week I read a script in which the writer didn't bother to end lines of dialogue with punctuation marks throughout about 50% of the script. Missing periods and missing question marks. It amazes me that this is something one would not notice.

To me, missing punctuation marks are glaring red neon signs I don't know where the sentence ends I can't tell if the line of dialogue was meant to be a question or a statement and the repeated use of the same repeated words which repeat again and again is distracting because pretty soon I just see the repeated words standing out highlighted against the rest of the words and this bothers me do you see what I mean

These tiny interruptions are anathema to a reader and death for a writer. Interestingly, as I have noted in the past, I have never read a great script with these problems. I have read great scripts with one or two mistakes - but not consistent problems on every page. Every page. Can you imagine?

Please take the time to proofread. And at least as importantly, take the time to write properly in the first place. I know that writers might be writing quickly, on the fly (on the subway, late at night, at a café) but taking the time to write well in the first place will save you a lot of errors. And always proofread before submitting your script to anyone. My job is not to slam scripts and give them a cold and brutal PASS. My job is to find out what is working and what is not and to help the writer take the script to the next level so that when it is read by a production company, agent or manager the writer has literally put his or her best foot forward. It makes my job a lot harder and less efficient if I have six things circled on every page. Treat me the way you would treat any other producer, manager or agent.

Lately, when I read scripts, I have a subtextual agenda. Is this a writer that I might want to manage? Is this the comedy I have been looking for? Is this an opportunity for me to make a valuable connection between the writer and somebody else? But if my read is herky jerky and peppered with interruptions, if the writer was too lazy or too hurried to use punctuation properly, if the writer consistently uses the language poorly - there's no way in HELL I'd work with them beyond these notes.

So if you're thinking about submitting a script to The Script Department for notes, please do a better job of proofreading. I have had a batch of scripts lately, peppered with tiny, very fixable errors. What if I personally read your script? What if I am looking for a great comedy right now? Full disclosure: I am. My readers will simply note the error and get you the notes. I will note the errors, get you your notes and then make a tiny mental note: this writer is lazy and sloppy - down the bad egg chute you go.

Every single person who reads your script in this industry is a possible new fan of you and your work. You never know where that can lead. I can't say it enough times - never send a script to anyone before you have gone over with a fine-tooth comb. You never know. This script could open doors and create connections. This script could get you an enthusiastic fan. Don't give us any excuse to write you off as a lazy writer. Pretty please?

Now get back to work.

If you enjoyed this post, follow me on Twitter or subscribe via RSS.

The C Word

Cliché. It's an ugly word, isn't it? Clee-shay. The fact that it's a French word adds to the shame of it. You can practically see that Gallic, upturned chin and averted gaze. Cliché. Touché. Ouch.

If I read a script that is cliché-ridden, I try to think of a more polite way to say it - can you dig deeper into the gum-chewing waitress and, um, maybe her name isn't Doris and she's got something other than a Southern accent? Most of my Script Department readers are more blunt, god bless their hard little hearts. That's what clients pay for; the unvarnished truth. But hearing that your script is riddled with cliché is just such a blow, it makes me cringe.

But here's the good news - it's not that hard to dig your way out of. Writing a clichéd situation or character is the easy way out, right? All you have to do is dig deeper, push yourself some, and really find that writer's soul you have to go over and above the easy stereotype to write in a more unique way.

Here's the thing - truly, every story has been told. But not every character has been written. Sometimes the sheer infinite potential for characters is overwhelming and it's easier to just hit the archetypal high notes. But there's a fine line between writing a TYPE and writing a cliché. The litmus test is sort of like that old saw about pornography; you know it when you see it. When I read a cliché, I literally cringe. And I think - how could the writer not know this?

Truth be told, I think writers do know when they've done it. I'm basing that on the roughly one million hours I've spent on the phone with clients, as we review and brainstorm notes they received. I always get a hangdog silence when the cliché comes up. Yeah, yeah. Caught me. But then we brainstorm together and rifle around in the character's back story, etc., until we find ways to bust out of that cliché.

Sometimes a cliché is a great jumping off point for subverting expectations and turning a corner with your character. Why, just the other day, I was working with a writer who had a clichéd situation between the two romantic leads of his action-adventure. Until we swapped the gender roles - then suddenly it was fresh. Ha! Cliché as your friend!

Can you tell if clichés are messing up your script? Well, it's always hard to get that distance from your own material. And there are writers who argue that they did it on purpose. Truth be told, of course, particularly in comedy, a kind of cliché can work - except, again, gaining distance from the cringe factor of cliché, what you might be striving for is a type.

Websters online defines a cliché as:

NOUN:

1. A trite or overused expression or idea: "Even while the phrase was degenerating to clich� in ordinary public use . . . scholars were giving it increasing attention" (Anthony Brandt).
2. A person or character whose behavior is predictable or superficial: "There is a young explorer . . . who turns out not to be quite the cliche expected" (John Crowley).

---

ETYMOLOGY:
French, past participle of clicher, to stereotype (imitative of the sound made when the matrix is dropped into molten metal to make a stereotype plate)

SYNONYMS:
cliche , bromide , commonplace , platitude , truism

These nouns denote an expression or idea that has lost its originality or force through overuse: a short story weakened by cliches; the old bromide that we are what we eat; uttered the commonplace "welcome aboard"; a eulogy full of platitudes; a once-original thought that has become a truism.

Not much positive in the definition, is there? So avoid cliché like the plague, Wavers, but if you've found yourself slumming in cliché-land, use it as an opportunity for your evolution as a writer. Dig deeper, try harder, rifle through the back story or through your own experiences.

Each human being and therefore character embodies an infinite number of possibilities. If it came easy to you - be warned, you might have written a cliché. And you'll know. Down deep, you'll be aware that you took the lazy way out. And be on the lookout for euphemistic cliché-speak: I liked it but some of the characters seemed kind of.....(polite silence).

If you enjoyed this post, follow me on Twitter or subscribe via RSS.

Watch Your Language

Malapropalooza has had a disappointing past couple of months. Sure, writers make mistakes but lately, only boring ones. It’s MAY not CAN – things like that. Ho hum. Come on you guys! The Wave-inatrix needs a good laugh!

Oh, but no tears, Wavers. The Wave-inatrix can always find some usage boo-boo that drive me nuts. For example: Like William Safire, who ran a piece in last week’s Sunday New York Times, I also get an eye tic when I see a writer maltreating the word “of”. As in – I could of gone there. KIDS – memorize this – it’s could HAVE. Interestingly, Safire noted that the reason many have lazily adopted “could of” is that it is a phonetic pronunciation of the contraction could’ve. Go ahead. Said it. Could’ve. Get it? Sounds like – could OF. BUT IT’S NOT. All right, I think I’ve beaten that horse to death.

Now, just for fun, here are some words that sound similar but have very different meanings – can you correctly define them?

Brevity
Levity

Pathos
Bathos

All right – good job – nobody peeked!

Brevity: shortness of duration; especially : shortness or conciseness of expression.

Levity: excessive or unseemly frivolity.

Pathos: an element in experience or in artistic representation evoking pity or compassion.

Bathos: insincere or overdone pathos; sentimentalism.

Give yourself five points and a cupcake if you got those correct. Now, here’s another one that absolute cracks the Wave-inatrix up when I see it confused:

Etymology – the study of the origin of words
Entomology – the study of BUGS

So it’s ETY – words and ENTO – bugs. Commit that to memory.

Random Expressions and Definitions:

You raise “hue and cry” – not HEW and cry. To “hew” something is to cut it. Hue and cry actually dates back to Latin: hutesium et clamor, "a horn and shouting".

Language, as we have discussed many a time, bends, twists and changes over time – and it always has.

Colloquialisms (and I’m quoting Wiki here) denote a manner of speaking or writing that is characteristic of familiar "common" conversation; informal colloquialisms can include words (such as "y'all", "gonna" or "grouty"), phrases (such as "ain't nothin'", "dressed for bear" and "dead as a doornail"), or sometimes even an entire aphorism. ("There's more than one way to skin a cat").

So, as one example, to lose your religion means to lose your sh*t, basically.

Slang is a little different in that “it is sometimes regional in that it is used only in a particular territory. Slang terms are frequently particular to a certain subculture, such as musicians, and members of minority groups. Nevertheless, usage of slang expressions can spread outside their original arenas to become commonly used, such as "cool" and "jive". While some words eventually lose their status as slang, others continue to be considered as such by most speakers. In spite of this, the process tends to lead the original users to replace the words with other, less-recognized terms to maintain group identity."

Why, just today my wonderful computer genius King of the World Greg Madore proclaimed something on my computer “mad sick”. Let me translate for you geezers – that’s akin to, oh, maybe something we would have called “wicked” or “way cool”.

Idiom (and here again, I thank my pal, Wiki) is an expression, that is a term or phrase whose meaning cannot be deduced from the literal definitions and the arrangement of its parts, but refers instead to a figurative meaning that is known only through common use.

Hang on – here’s your daily dose of Big Rouge Wave Entertainment – the Wiki definition of Idiom goes on:

In the English expression to spank the monkey, for example, a listener knowing only the meaning of spank and monkey would be unable to deduce the expression's actual meaning (which is to masturbate vigorously). Although it can refer literally to the act of striking an actual monkey with a hand, native speakers rarely use it that way. It cannot be directly translated to other languages – for example, the same expression in German is den Affen schlagen (to strike the ape), with the ape being as detachable from its usual meaning as the monkey in the English phrase is. The same expression in Dutch is het loodje leggen (to lay the piece of lead), which is entirely different from the English expression, too. Other expressions include taking the pink canoe to tuna town and yummy touchy cheeky time. It is estimated that William Shakespeare coined over 2,000 idioms still in use today

And now, dear Wavers, I leave you with a hysterical and appropriately themed video from Funny or Die: Palatial Regalia

If you enjoyed this post, follow me on Twitter or subscribe via RSS.

Semantics is a Bitch

I'm no Betty Friedan or Germaine Greer but I feel I owe powerful, intelligent women a debt. Women like the aforementioned. Women like Susan Sontag, Madame Curie, George Sand, Susan B. Anthony, Madonna, Oprah Winfrey, Naomi Wolf, Hilary Clinton, Helen Keller - oh I must stop now because I'll offend someone, somehow with an inclusion or exclusion but you get my drift. In a world where the bodies of 40 women were recently found on the outskirts of Baghdad, in a ditch, with notes on their mutilated bodies explaining that they met their deaths for not wearing proper headscarves, powerful, influential trailblazers who just happen to be women pave the way for a better world.

When I was a kid, a bitch was a nasty, unpleasant woman. It was a pretty dirty word. It was also a female dog and that was the only way we kids could attempt snickering subterfuge. But today bitch has taken on a hyper ugly meaning of subjugation. Men can be bitches. Anyone can be a byotch, the ha-ha internet-censorship-free version of bitch which has taken on a life of its own.

I hear the word bitch used almost daily by Jon Stewart, by friends, by my daughter to her friends, on the radio - seemingly everywhere. One of my friends said it to me the other day on the phone and we both laughed an uneasy laugh before it trailed off into discomfort. I wonder - how have we come to this? How have we come to tolerate a word that could not possibly embody a deeper, uglier belief about the way in which women are esteemed in this world? We can have women senators and judges and television anchors but at the end of the day, in jest which burns in acidic truth - they're just bitches and Jennifer Love Hewitt, all (I'm guessing) a hundred eighteen pounds of her - has a fat ass.

Bitch is a lose-lose word. To call a man a bitch is to say he is being either snippy, needy or hysterical OR that the bitch label recipient is in some way owned by the speaker in the most final, definitive way possible. She's my bitch. Where's my beer - bitch? I slapped that bitch. That's what I said - bitch.

The use of bitch with this new, more keen, deeply misogynistic twist of total subjugation seems to have emerged from rap music. Nobody shoot me - that's just my anecdotal observation. And no, it's not pc. The Wave-inatrix, with her playful moniker which connotes domination knows that Rouge Wavers are smart enough to know that this is playful nickname that stuck and bears no relationship to my views or demeanor. So no pot calling kettle black comments about hair-splitting semantics, please. This discussion is important.

Regardless of the derivation of this new usage, I do wonder - is this okay, this new use of bitch? What does it say about us as a society? Do we accept a word as a joke but overlook it's deeper meaning because that's being over-analytical? Or is this something we should be paying attention to?

To paraphrase George Orwell, who understood deeply that language matters, it is my opinion that the use of the word bitch is double-plus ungood.

If you enjoyed this post, follow me on Twitter or subscribe via RSS.

Common Usage Errors

Sometimes grammar school seems like a million years ago and all that conjunction junction stuff went right out the window. Absolutely everybody makes mistakes; sometimes the more you stare at pages the easier it is to gloss over a usage error or misspell. And these days, language is morphing rapidly, with new words being born all the time and with usage becoming more and more casual. As important as it is to go with the flow and to like, acknowledge that the inclusion of, like, the word like, is part of the patois, it is also important to have a firm grasp of the basics.

Check out the OWL at Purdue University as a really handy grammar and usage resource. Even though the Wave-inatrix spends 90% of each day either reading or writing, which makes her relatively formidable, she will freely admit that most of her usage is based on gut intuition alone. Things just do or do not sound right. But can the Wave-inatrix explain the rule? No way.

Writing is our craft, Wavers, and we shall not and cannot ignore the rules. A sailor must learn the ropes before sailing down the mighty Hudson and so must writers learn the rules before setting out to write our novels, short stories, scripts or poems.

I have excerpted a bit from the Owl, below, about commonly confused words. Some Rouge Wavers may roll they're eyes, thinking their to smart too make these silly erors but trust the Wave-inatrix, you do make these errors - we all do - and nothing makes a reader respect you less then seeing them. See how your getting anoyed just reading this? Its just bearly readible.

Accept, Except
accept = verb meaning to receive or to agree: He accepted their praise graciously.
except = preposition meaning all but, other than: Everyone went to the game except Alyson.

affect = verb meaning to influence: Will lack of sleep affect your game?
effect = noun meaning result or consequence: Will lack of sleep have an effect on your game?
effect = verb meaning to bring about, to accomplish: Our efforts have effected a major change in university policy.

Advise, Advice
advise = verb that means to recommend, suggest, or counsel: I advise you to be cautious.
advice = noun that means an opinion or recommendation about what could or should be done: I'd like to ask for your advice on this matter.

Conscious, Conscience
conscious = adjective meaning awake, perceiving: Despite a head injury, the patient remained conscious.
conscience = noun meaning the sense of obligation to be good: Chris wouldn't cheat because his conscience wouldn't let him.

Idea, Ideal
idea = noun meaning a thought, belief, or conception held in the mind, or a general notion or conception formed by generalization: Jennifer had a brilliant idea -- she'd go to the Writing Lab for help with her papers!
ideal = noun meaning something or someone that embodies perfection, or an ultimate object or endeavor: Mickey was the ideal for tutors everywhere.
ideal = adjective meaning embodying an ultimate standard of excellence or perfection, or the best; Jennifer was an ideal student.

Its, It's
its = possessive adjective (possesive form of the pronoun it): The crab had an unusual growth on its shell.
it's = contraction for it is or it has (in a verb phrase): It's still raining; it's been raining for three days. (Pronouns have apostrophes only when two words are being shortened into one.)

Lead, Led
lead = noun referring to a dense metallic element: The X-ray technician wore a vest lined with lead.
led = past-tense and past-participle form of the verb to lead, meaning to guide or direct: The evidence led the jury to reach a unanimous decision.

Than, Then
Than: used in comparison statements: He is richer than I.
or
used in statements of preference: I would rather dance than eat.
or
used to suggest quantities beyond a specified amount: Read more than the first paragraph.

Then: a time other than now: He was younger then. She will start her new job then.
or
next in time, space, or order: First we must study; then we can play.
or
suggesting a logical conclusion: If you've studied hard, then the exam should be no problem.

Their, There, They're
Their = possessive pronoun: They got their books.
There = that place: My house is over there. (This is a place word, and so it contains the word here.)
They're = contraction for they are: They're making dinner. (Pronouns have apostrophes only when two words are being shortened into one.)

To, Too, Two
To = preposition, or first part of the infinitive form of a verb: They went to the lake to swim.
Too = very, also: I was too tired to continue. I was hungry, too.
Two = the number 2: Two students scored below passing on the exam.

We're, Where, Were
We're = contraction for we are: We're glad to help. (Pronouns have apostrophes only when two words are being shortened into one.)
Where = location: Where are you going? (This is a place word, and so it contains the word here.)
Were = a past tense form of the verb be: They were walking side by side.

Your, You're
Your = possessive pronoun: Your shoes are untied.
You're = contraction for you are: You're walking around with your shoes untied. (Pronouns have apostrophes only when two words are being shortened into one.)

One Word or Two?

All ready/already
all ready: used as an adjective to express complete preparedness
already: an adverb expressing time
At last I was all ready to go, but everyone had already left.

All right/alright
all right: used as an adjective or adverb; older and more formal spelling, more common in scientific & academic writing: Will you be all right on your own?
alright: Alternate spelling of all right; less frequent but used often in journalistic and business publications, and especially common infictional dialogue: He does alright in school.

All together/altogether
all together: an adverb meaning considered as a whole, summed up: All together, there were thirty-two students at the museum.
altogether: an intensifying adverb meaning wholly, completely, entirely: His comment raises an altogether different problem.

Anyone/any one
anyone: a pronoun meaning any person at all: Anyone who can solve this problem deserves an award.
any one: a paired adjective and noun meaning a specific item in a group; usually used with of: Any one of those papers could serve as an example.
Note: There are similar distinctions in meaning for everyone and every one

Anyway/any way
anyway: an adverb meaning in any case or nonetheless: He objected, but she went anyway.
any way: a paired adjective and noun meaning any particular course, direction, or manner: Any way we chose would lead to danger.

Awhile/a while
awhile: an adverb meaning for a short time; some readers consider it nonstandard; usually needs no preposition: Won't you stay awhile?
a while: a paired article and noun meaning a period of time; usually used with for: We talked for a while, and then we said good night.

Maybe/may be
maybe: an adverb meaning perhaps: Maybe we should wait until the rain stops.
may be: a form of the verb be: This may be our only chance to win the championship.

Again, I urge you to bookmark the The OWL at Purdue University. There are exercises, tips and lessons that are really great for brushing up.

If you enjoyed this post, follow me on Twitter or subscribe via RSS.

Typos

Often neophyte writers, particularly on discussion boards, will argue at length about the necessity of following every “rule”’; how many brads to use, is it “who” or “whom”, never use VO, never use flashback, avoid ellipses…and the list goes on. The truth of the matter is that what Peter Guber once said - There are no rules in Hollywood, but break them at your own risk – is absolutely true.

I am of the opinion that pedantry kills creativity. Story is the number one most important signifier of a good script. Yes, execution is important, but the bottom line is: does this writer have a good story to tell? One the reader or exec hasn’t seen before? One that is compelling, exciting and resonant? I know, I know, that is getting old – but it is the truest thing I can ever say about writing a script that will get noticed.

Readers are very often writers themselves. Being a reader puts a writer in the catbird seat, so to speak. It also makes us tend to be cinefiles and wordfreaks. So while we might not comment on “flair gun” instead of “flare gun”, we will notice it. If errors are peppered throughout the script, the reader will begin to feel that this writer has no respect for, much less command of the language. And that makes us cranky. Readers are entrusted to be the gatekeepers. Of course, we do have rules and regulations: Be fast. Be tough. Be professional. By professional I mean it is not cool for a reader to really slam a writer. Even if the material is horrific, it’s just not done. If you want to keep your job that is. But there is definitely some wiggle room. Readers are subjective, at the end of the day. We can slant our coverage to sound encouraging and upbeat – even if it’s a pass. Or the coverage can be a bit biting if the writer has annoyed us to a great degree. Avoid annoying anyone who reads your script. A pass because the material isn’t that great or isn’t a fit for the company is nothing to be ashamed of. But you do not want a coverage circulating in the office that slams you as a writer with polite but slightly sarcastic comments about your writing skill-set. Your rep will read that coverage too. Your overall reputation will dim. When you’re just starting off, you can’t afford to go downhill in the estimation of professionals reading your work.

An insider tip: it is actually considered poor form for a reader to point out spelling or grammar mistakes in a coverage. Unless the number of mistakes warrant the mention. Many coverages include two pass/consider/recommend categories: the script – and the writer. A writer with a number of mistakes will get a pass writer – for sure. Even if the material is actually a “consider”. Why? Because the whole idea of rating the writer is a way of setting this writer aside for future consideration for other projects. A writer who has a character “slam on his breaks” is not a writer this company will consider for an assignment. Why? Because as I mentioned above, there are a whole lot of gifted writers out there who don’t have any typos in their scripts. So who would you choose to hire?

Of particular concern are the mistakes that the spell-check won’t find: Break for brake. Bizarre for bazaar. Rouge instead of rogue. Flair for flare. Now, here’s the thing: the worst kind of typo you could possibly have is the one that will make the reader or exec laugh out loud. Nothing kills a moment like a guffaw. The flair gun which titles this missive is a real example and one that gave me a much appreciated belly laugh and images of a gun shooting fabulous clothing and great shoes. But I really don’t think the writer was going for laughter in that moment.

Obviously, you want to have a perfect script. I can’t stress often enough how stiff the competition is. For every dilettante writing pretentious scripts that you sneer at, there are ten gifted writers with scripts circulating in the business right now. And they are repped and they are making deals. And if they aren’t now, they will be soon. So the bar is pretty high.

People have oft argued whether trouble with spelling and grammar is indicative of overall ineptitude with language. Not necessarily, no. But it doesn’t bode well. It’s like showing up for a job interview with a ketchup stain on your clothes. It makes you look like a schmuck. The solution is simple: get your script proofread by someone with a good eye for such things. And don’t sweat buckets if there are one or two mistakes left in anyway. We don’t care that much, we really don’t. Unless it’s clear that you don’t.

If you enjoyed this post, follow me on Twitter or subscribe via RSS.