Simply saying "be nice" does nothing to address any specific problem. If it did, we'd not have stacks of books thick with all the laws of the country, there'd just be a plaque with those two words.
If it did, we'd not need Black Lives Matter, or any of the other movements that seek to address specific causes.
This thread is about language and effective communication - Telling people stop doing wrong does nothing unless you also tell them what they're doing wrong.
Are you seriously saying you need a book of rules to understand what right and wrong is? Surely for day-to-day life, that thick old book of rules is only relevant when it is being thrown in your face at a court of law?
And BLM is an exact example of the type of communication I was referencing. BLM doesn't say "any rules" in the heading now does it?
Typical boomer sticky plaster over a problem. If you have people leaving the fridge door open, there is a much bigger behavioural/cultural problem at your work. Again, typical boomer behaviour to assume that a (grammatically correct, no less) sign that says shut the fridge door will solve the problem - assuming that the chap or chapess who can't be bothered to close the door will read and respect a note saying as such
I stopped at "firstly" because I realised how deep in the money you must be to be arguing that a sign is the way to solve people closing
a fridge door and felt a secondly wasn't required
