Comment on Ordered back to the office, top tech talent left instead, study findsComments−mvkel2yOf the -really- talented tech folks I know, the opposite happened.−relyks2yThey wanted to go back to working in an office setting?−dietr1ch2yThey were not ordered to go back to the office? They were ordered not to go back to the office?−vundercind2yOrdered front to the office, top tech talent right instead.(It really is puzzling what exactly was intended by “opposite”)−kfarr2yStudy did not find top talent joined when ordered to go back to the home−latency-guy22yI suppose being blatantly obtuse and extremely literal worked as an argument this time, pray it'll work again for you the next time you want to employ this argument.−relyks2yYeah, what he's saying contradicts what the article is suggesting. That's why I'm asking about it−dietr1ch2y(I was just highlighting how ambiguous "opposite" is there)
Comments
Of the -really- talented tech folks I know, the opposite happened.
They wanted to go back to working in an office setting?
They were not ordered to go back to the office? They were ordered not to go back to the office?
Ordered front to the office, top tech talent right instead.
(It really is puzzling what exactly was intended by “opposite”)
Study did not find top talent joined when ordered to go back to the home
I suppose being blatantly obtuse and extremely literal worked as an argument this time, pray it'll work again for you the next time you want to employ this argument.
Yeah, what he's saying contradicts what the article is suggesting. That's why I'm asking about it
(I was just highlighting how ambiguous "opposite" is there)