Is there a nicer/politer/more positive alternative for “negates”?
I have somewhere the following sentence:
our platform negates the need for a middleman ...
but I do not want to offend or upset the middlemen whomever it is ... there are many middlemen in the context I'm reffering to there.
The question is how can I replace "negate" that is too abrupt, radical and may upset people with something more reasonable?
Would "diminishes" be a good alternative? other suggestions?
single-word-requests meaning synonyms
asked 4 hours ago
SkyWalkerSkyWalker
1112
New contributor
SkyWalker is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
I have somewhere the following sentence:
our platform negates the need for a middleman ...
but I do not want to offend or upset the middlemen whomever it is ... there are many middlemen in the context I'm reffering to there.
The question is how can I replace "negate" that is too abrupt, radical and may upset people with something more reasonable?
Would "diminishes" be a good alternative? other suggestions?
single-word-requests meaning synonyms
asked 4 hours ago
SkyWalkerSkyWalker
1112
New contributor
SkyWalker is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
How about "offsets"?
– Hot Licks
4 hours ago
3
“Eliminates the middleman” is a common phrase, but i don’t see how that would make the middleman any happier.
– Damila
4 hours ago
If you're trying not to offend the middlemen that you're trying to eliminate, I suspect that it's not a matter of word choice (put away the thesaurus) but of phrasing. As Paul S. Lee notes below, you may need to avoid explicitly saying that you're getting rid of them, and instead put some positive spin on how you're saying it. That said, as @Damila said, "cutting out the middleman" is a very common expression, and you might get away with using it if your audience doesn't realize that you're using it completely literally.
– A C
54 mins ago
add a comment |
I have somewhere the following sentence:
our platform negates the need for a middleman ...
but I do not want to offend or upset the middlemen whomever it is ... there are many middlemen in the context I'm reffering to there.
The question is how can I replace "negate" that is too abrupt, radical and may upset people with something more reasonable?
Would "diminishes" be a good alternative? other suggestions?
single-word-requests meaning synonyms
asked 4 hours ago
SkyWalkerSkyWalker
1112
New contributor
SkyWalker is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
I have somewhere the following sentence:
our platform negates the need for a middleman ...
but I do not want to offend or upset the middlemen whomever it is ... there are many middlemen in the context I'm reffering to there.
The question is how can I replace "negate" that is too abrupt, radical and may upset people with something more reasonable?
Would "diminishes" be a good alternative? other suggestions?
single-word-requests meaning synonyms
single-word-requests meaning synonyms
asked 4 hours ago
SkyWalkerSkyWalker
1112
New contributor
SkyWalker is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 4 hours ago
SkyWalkerSkyWalker
1112
New contributor
SkyWalker is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 4 hours ago
SkyWalkerSkyWalker
1112
New contributor
SkyWalker is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 4 hours ago
SkyWalkerSkyWalker
1112
asked 4 hours ago
SkyWalkerSkyWalker
1112
1112
New contributor
SkyWalker is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
SkyWalker is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
SkyWalker is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
How about "offsets"?
– Hot Licks
4 hours ago
3
“Eliminates the middleman” is a common phrase, but i don’t see how that would make the middleman any happier.
– Damila
4 hours ago
If you're trying not to offend the middlemen that you're trying to eliminate, I suspect that it's not a matter of word choice (put away the thesaurus) but of phrasing. As Paul S. Lee notes below, you may need to avoid explicitly saying that you're getting rid of them, and instead put some positive spin on how you're saying it. That said, as @Damila said, "cutting out the middleman" is a very common expression, and you might get away with using it if your audience doesn't realize that you're using it completely literally.
– A C
54 mins ago
add a comment |
How about "offsets"?
– Hot Licks
4 hours ago
3
“Eliminates the middleman” is a common phrase, but i don’t see how that would make the middleman any happier.
– Damila
4 hours ago
If you're trying not to offend the middlemen that you're trying to eliminate, I suspect that it's not a matter of word choice (put away the thesaurus) but of phrasing. As Paul S. Lee notes below, you may need to avoid explicitly saying that you're getting rid of them, and instead put some positive spin on how you're saying it. That said, as @Damila said, "cutting out the middleman" is a very common expression, and you might get away with using it if your audience doesn't realize that you're using it completely literally.
– A C
54 mins ago
How about "offsets"?
– Hot Licks
4 hours ago
How about "offsets"?
– Hot Licks
4 hours ago
3
3
“Eliminates the middleman” is a common phrase, but i don’t see how that would make the middleman any happier.
– Damila
4 hours ago
“Eliminates the middleman” is a common phrase, but i don’t see how that would make the middleman any happier.
– Damila
4 hours ago
If you're trying not to offend the middlemen that you're trying to eliminate, I suspect that it's not a matter of word choice (put away the thesaurus) but of phrasing. As Paul S. Lee notes below, you may need to avoid explicitly saying that you're getting rid of them, and instead put some positive spin on how you're saying it. That said, as @Damila said, "cutting out the middleman" is a very common expression, and you might get away with using it if your audience doesn't realize that you're using it completely literally.
– A C
54 mins ago
If you're trying not to offend the middlemen that you're trying to eliminate, I suspect that it's not a matter of word choice (put away the thesaurus) but of phrasing. As Paul S. Lee notes below, you may need to avoid explicitly saying that you're getting rid of them, and instead put some positive spin on how you're saying it. That said, as @Damila said, "cutting out the middleman" is a very common expression, and you might get away with using it if your audience doesn't realize that you're using it completely literally.
– A C
54 mins ago
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
A (somewhat formal/technical) term used in such situations is obviate.
our platform obviates the need for a middleman ...
ODO:
obviate
VERB [WITH OBJECT]
1 Remove (a need or difficulty)
‘the presence of roller blinds obviated the need for curtains’
answered 4 hours ago
alwayslearningalwayslearning
26.4k63894
'Obviates' is another way of saying 'by-passes,' using Latin roots.
– Hugh
2 hours ago
add a comment |
I'd say:
Our platform allows you to forgo the middleman.
(Positive language, as opposed to negative.)
answered 4 hours ago
ElGElG
111
New contributor
ElG is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Or even: Our platform allows you to go straight to the <source, end customer, whatever> or gives you direct access to, allows direct interaction with... don’t mention middlemen at all.
– Jim
1 hour ago
I like this answer since "allows you" shifts the attention to the purchaser of the platform / end user.
– Paul S. Lee
1 hour ago
add a comment |
I'm in IT development, where our raison d'etre is to automate business processes which often put some people out of job. The standard approach we use to sell IT projects when we cannot outright eliminate the jobs is to empower them to do more value-added service to the business because with automation they have more time to do so.
I don't know your situation. If the middleman can be re-purposed you can say "our platform frees the middleman from administrative duties to empower them for ..."
EDIT: I didn't notice that Elliot already suggested the same thing.
answered 2 hours ago
Paul S. LeePaul S. Lee
1244
New contributor
Paul S. Lee is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
For one, I'd say if the need is only diminished then the platform has does not do the whole job. You are only ending the Need for the middleman. You are not taking them away and chopping them up. There are surely better things for them to go and do.
For alternatives you could use "Removes" or "Eliminates" the need. If you hope to be very gentle you could "relieve" the need for the middleman but that would be an odd choice.
Or get around it by "replacing" the middleman or 'Doing the job of the middleman'. In any case you are selling a function or product. It's impact on individuals is not part of the design or construction of the item.
answered 4 hours ago
ElliotElliot
742
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
SkyWalker is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f490767%2fis-there-a-nicer-politer-more-positive-alternative-for-negates%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
A (somewhat formal/technical) term used in such situations is obviate.
our platform obviates the need for a middleman ...
ODO:
obviate
VERB [WITH OBJECT]
1 Remove (a need or difficulty)
‘the presence of roller blinds obviated the need for curtains’
answered 4 hours ago
alwayslearningalwayslearning
26.4k63894
'Obviates' is another way of saying 'by-passes,' using Latin roots.
– Hugh
2 hours ago
add a comment |
A (somewhat formal/technical) term used in such situations is obviate.
our platform obviates the need for a middleman ...
ODO:
obviate
VERB [WITH OBJECT]
1 Remove (a need or difficulty)
‘the presence of roller blinds obviated the need for curtains’
answered 4 hours ago
alwayslearningalwayslearning
26.4k63894
'Obviates' is another way of saying 'by-passes,' using Latin roots.
– Hugh
2 hours ago
add a comment |
A (somewhat formal/technical) term used in such situations is obviate.
our platform obviates the need for a middleman ...
ODO:
obviate
VERB [WITH OBJECT]
1 Remove (a need or difficulty)
‘the presence of roller blinds obviated the need for curtains’
answered 4 hours ago
alwayslearningalwayslearning
26.4k63894
A (somewhat formal/technical) term used in such situations is obviate.
our platform obviates the need for a middleman ...
ODO:
obviate
VERB [WITH OBJECT]
1 Remove (a need or difficulty)
‘the presence of roller blinds obviated the need for curtains’
answered 4 hours ago
alwayslearningalwayslearning
26.4k63894
answered 4 hours ago
alwayslearningalwayslearning
26.4k63894
answered 4 hours ago
alwayslearningalwayslearning
26.4k63894
answered 4 hours ago
alwayslearningalwayslearning
26.4k63894
26.4k63894
'Obviates' is another way of saying 'by-passes,' using Latin roots.
– Hugh
2 hours ago
add a comment |
'Obviates' is another way of saying 'by-passes,' using Latin roots.
– Hugh
2 hours ago
'Obviates' is another way of saying 'by-passes,' using Latin roots.
– Hugh
2 hours ago
'Obviates' is another way of saying 'by-passes,' using Latin roots.
– Hugh
2 hours ago
add a comment |
I'd say:
Our platform allows you to forgo the middleman.
(Positive language, as opposed to negative.)
answered 4 hours ago
ElGElG
111
New contributor
ElG is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Or even: Our platform allows you to go straight to the <source, end customer, whatever> or gives you direct access to, allows direct interaction with... don’t mention middlemen at all.
– Jim
1 hour ago
I like this answer since "allows you" shifts the attention to the purchaser of the platform / end user.
– Paul S. Lee
1 hour ago
add a comment |
I'd say:
Our platform allows you to forgo the middleman.
(Positive language, as opposed to negative.)
answered 4 hours ago
ElGElG
111
New contributor
ElG is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Or even: Our platform allows you to go straight to the <source, end customer, whatever> or gives you direct access to, allows direct interaction with... don’t mention middlemen at all.
– Jim
1 hour ago
I like this answer since "allows you" shifts the attention to the purchaser of the platform / end user.
– Paul S. Lee
1 hour ago
add a comment |
I'd say:
Our platform allows you to forgo the middleman.
(Positive language, as opposed to negative.)
answered 4 hours ago
ElGElG
111
New contributor
ElG is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
I'd say:
Our platform allows you to forgo the middleman.
(Positive language, as opposed to negative.)
answered 4 hours ago
ElGElG
111
New contributor
ElG is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 4 hours ago
ElGElG
111
New contributor
ElG is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 4 hours ago
ElGElG
111
answered 4 hours ago
ElGElG
111
111
New contributor
ElG is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
ElG is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
ElG is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Or even: Our platform allows you to go straight to the <source, end customer, whatever> or gives you direct access to, allows direct interaction with... don’t mention middlemen at all.
– Jim
1 hour ago
I like this answer since "allows you" shifts the attention to the purchaser of the platform / end user.
– Paul S. Lee
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Or even: Our platform allows you to go straight to the <source, end customer, whatever> or gives you direct access to, allows direct interaction with... don’t mention middlemen at all.
– Jim
1 hour ago
I like this answer since "allows you" shifts the attention to the purchaser of the platform / end user.
– Paul S. Lee
1 hour ago
Or even: Our platform allows you to go straight to the <source, end customer, whatever> or gives you direct access to, allows direct interaction with... don’t mention middlemen at all.
– Jim
1 hour ago
Or even: Our platform allows you to go straight to the <source, end customer, whatever> or gives you direct access to, allows direct interaction with... don’t mention middlemen at all.
– Jim
1 hour ago
I like this answer since "allows you" shifts the attention to the purchaser of the platform / end user.
– Paul S. Lee
1 hour ago
I like this answer since "allows you" shifts the attention to the purchaser of the platform / end user.
– Paul S. Lee
1 hour ago
add a comment |
I'm in IT development, where our raison d'etre is to automate business processes which often put some people out of job. The standard approach we use to sell IT projects when we cannot outright eliminate the jobs is to empower them to do more value-added service to the business because with automation they have more time to do so.
I don't know your situation. If the middleman can be re-purposed you can say "our platform frees the middleman from administrative duties to empower them for ..."
EDIT: I didn't notice that Elliot already suggested the same thing.
answered 2 hours ago
Paul S. LeePaul S. Lee
1244
New contributor
Paul S. Lee is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
I'm in IT development, where our raison d'etre is to automate business processes which often put some people out of job. The standard approach we use to sell IT projects when we cannot outright eliminate the jobs is to empower them to do more value-added service to the business because with automation they have more time to do so.
I don't know your situation. If the middleman can be re-purposed you can say "our platform frees the middleman from administrative duties to empower them for ..."
EDIT: I didn't notice that Elliot already suggested the same thing.
answered 2 hours ago
Paul S. LeePaul S. Lee
1244
New contributor
Paul S. Lee is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
I'm in IT development, where our raison d'etre is to automate business processes which often put some people out of job. The standard approach we use to sell IT projects when we cannot outright eliminate the jobs is to empower them to do more value-added service to the business because with automation they have more time to do so.
I don't know your situation. If the middleman can be re-purposed you can say "our platform frees the middleman from administrative duties to empower them for ..."
EDIT: I didn't notice that Elliot already suggested the same thing.
answered 2 hours ago
Paul S. LeePaul S. Lee
1244
New contributor
Paul S. Lee is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
I'm in IT development, where our raison d'etre is to automate business processes which often put some people out of job. The standard approach we use to sell IT projects when we cannot outright eliminate the jobs is to empower them to do more value-added service to the business because with automation they have more time to do so.
I don't know your situation. If the middleman can be re-purposed you can say "our platform frees the middleman from administrative duties to empower them for ..."
EDIT: I didn't notice that Elliot already suggested the same thing.
answered 2 hours ago
Paul S. LeePaul S. Lee
1244
New contributor
Paul S. Lee is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 2 hours ago
Paul S. LeePaul S. Lee
1244
New contributor
Paul S. Lee is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 2 hours ago
Paul S. LeePaul S. Lee
1244
answered 2 hours ago
Paul S. LeePaul S. Lee
1244
1244
New contributor
Paul S. Lee is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Paul S. Lee is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Paul S. Lee is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
For one, I'd say if the need is only diminished then the platform has does not do the whole job. You are only ending the Need for the middleman. You are not taking them away and chopping them up. There are surely better things for them to go and do.
For alternatives you could use "Removes" or "Eliminates" the need. If you hope to be very gentle you could "relieve" the need for the middleman but that would be an odd choice.
Or get around it by "replacing" the middleman or 'Doing the job of the middleman'. In any case you are selling a function or product. It's impact on individuals is not part of the design or construction of the item.
answered 4 hours ago
ElliotElliot
742
add a comment |
For one, I'd say if the need is only diminished then the platform has does not do the whole job. You are only ending the Need for the middleman. You are not taking them away and chopping them up. There are surely better things for them to go and do.
For alternatives you could use "Removes" or "Eliminates" the need. If you hope to be very gentle you could "relieve" the need for the middleman but that would be an odd choice.
Or get around it by "replacing" the middleman or 'Doing the job of the middleman'. In any case you are selling a function or product. It's impact on individuals is not part of the design or construction of the item.
answered 4 hours ago
ElliotElliot
742
add a comment |
For one, I'd say if the need is only diminished then the platform has does not do the whole job. You are only ending the Need for the middleman. You are not taking them away and chopping them up. There are surely better things for them to go and do.
For alternatives you could use "Removes" or "Eliminates" the need. If you hope to be very gentle you could "relieve" the need for the middleman but that would be an odd choice.
Or get around it by "replacing" the middleman or 'Doing the job of the middleman'. In any case you are selling a function or product. It's impact on individuals is not part of the design or construction of the item.
answered 4 hours ago
ElliotElliot
742
For one, I'd say if the need is only diminished then the platform has does not do the whole job. You are only ending the Need for the middleman. You are not taking them away and chopping them up. There are surely better things for them to go and do.
For alternatives you could use "Removes" or "Eliminates" the need. If you hope to be very gentle you could "relieve" the need for the middleman but that would be an odd choice.
Or get around it by "replacing" the middleman or 'Doing the job of the middleman'. In any case you are selling a function or product. It's impact on individuals is not part of the design or construction of the item.
answered 4 hours ago
ElliotElliot
742
answered 4 hours ago
ElliotElliot
742
answered 4 hours ago
ElliotElliot
742
answered 4 hours ago
ElliotElliot
742
742
add a comment |
add a comment |
SkyWalker is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
SkyWalker is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
SkyWalker is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
SkyWalker is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f490767%2fis-there-a-nicer-politer-more-positive-alternative-for-negates%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
How about "offsets"?
– Hot Licks
4 hours ago
3
“Eliminates the middleman” is a common phrase, but i don’t see how that would make the middleman any happier.
– Damila
4 hours ago
If you're trying not to offend the middlemen that you're trying to eliminate, I suspect that it's not a matter of word choice (put away the thesaurus) but of phrasing. As Paul S. Lee notes below, you may need to avoid explicitly saying that you're getting rid of them, and instead put some positive spin on how you're saying it. That said, as @Damila said, "cutting out the middleman" is a very common expression, and you might get away with using it if your audience doesn't realize that you're using it completely literally.
– A C
54 mins ago