Timeline for Do something and "win"
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| yesterday | history | became hot network question | |||
| yesterday | comment | added | DjinTonic | I've added pragmatics to the question tags | |
| yesterday | history | edited | DjinTonic |
edited tags
|
|
| yesterday | comment | added | Andy Bonner | Is this a question about language or about truth-in-advertising laws and their enforcement? (or maybe about ethics?) As language, it's phrased imperatively, and you can order anyone to anything, including the impossible. | |
| yesterday | answer | added | DjinTonic | timeline score: 3 | |
| yesterday | comment | added | Edwin Ashworth | The ads never seem to show the many thousands of non-winners (essentially, losers) when they promote a given lottery, say. Neither do they give a list of the salaries promoters are on. One wonders why this would be seen as biased in say reporting but doesn't seem to worry those who want ads to be 'legal, decent. honest and truthful'. I suppose 'Do something and lose' is proportionately more truthful ... but I've never heard this exhortation. | |
| yesterday | comment | added | fev | It's advertising! They cunningly make you imagine through such vivid language that you are the winner, which is more attractive than could be the winner, and far more than dream on!. | |
| yesterday | answer | added | Nuclear Hoagie | timeline score: 4 | |
| yesterday | comment | added | Kate Bunting | Obviously it means "have a chance of winning", but it isn't 'wrong' in the sense that the Advertising Standards Authority (or its equivalent) is going to prosecute them for misleading the public! | |
| yesterday | history | asked | Rohit Gupta | CC BY-SA 4.0 |