Not wrong … confusing affect and effect affects credibility. The effect is immediate: readers sense something’s off and your rigor gets questioned. Doubt spreads. One small confusion cascades into a measurable effect on how seriously your work affects not just your credibility, but even ‘authority’.
Of course the effect of those words might also have you believe that I am ‘affected’.
@dave 🤓
@dave BTW - just added my MB mentions to Feedland - and see exactly the problem with the Feedname - if you added 5 of them (why aside) .. pretty quickly you will lose the context of the ‘WHO’ - hopefully @manton can make the change - of course what would be really cool is that in Feedland I could get to change name - already can do that in Reeder and NetNewsWire?
@dave S-E-E-N ❗️
Mental age models that turn my head … part two
Jagger .. 82
McCartney .. 83
so Paul Anka?
as of typing this .. 84
@manton looking forward to…
@ayjay the article contains the most 🤯 I have read so far today …
> all the way back in 1996
@AndySylvester sorry yes .. I wasn’t disagreeing .. on board with you both .. it just kicked the synapses down a side road.
@dave beyond tuned in .. locked on speed dial if you’ll pardon the mixed metaphor 🤪