The poll also reveals that only 4 individuals or just 7% support the use of the word ‘frauded’ which includes you (who by your own omission had never heard of/seen either “defrauded” or “frauded” before) and @hashbridge who wrote the text in the first place…
Point is no option is going to please everyone, and the “best” option is entirely subjective depending on what lens you choose to look at the situation from.
I see the points you are all making, I do, I’m not even totally bound to the word that has been chosen. The current wording isn’t clear to everyone and the other options aren’t preferable to everyone either.
With that in mind I just don’t think that any of this warrants the effort to change what’s already in place.
I agree with the whole of your post except for this one bit.
It would be so easy to change this one piece of text that the “effort to change it” shouldn’t even register as a concern. It would probably have taken less time to change it than to provide the drawn-out explanation/justification we got on this thread earlier today.
(PS: Also, defrauded is the direct analogue to frauded - really, the “correct” version of what frauded is trying to say - which is why I said they should use that. If there is concern around how clear that is, it is also trivial to use the other “vicitm of fraud” phrasing. Both would be so easy to just “slot in”!)
The topic has morphed, it seems to me, from “Is…” to “Why was it used?).
I think the author may have overestimated his cache. Mistake made on this occasion as demonstrated by the verbose attempt at justification. Thin, at best.
Translation. Some people want to use incorrect words that might confuse in order to prompt customers to research what the correct word is. For clarity. And to lose two letters.
I can picture @hashbridge going oh why did I join into this conversation.
Don’t worry you can end the chaos now by quickly adding ‘de’ and all will be forgiven.
Indeed, you’re on the money to my mind!
I think we all collectively thought at the start that it may be a word we hadn’t individually come across, which led to our nice weekend discussion over the history of language and other things, before the revelation earlier today that Monzo essentially knew it wasn’t a word but thought it ought to be, so they wilfully made up a new word. We are now into the territory of discussion over whether or not banks should make up words, and most of us come firmly down against that view? Monzo know this, but don’t want to back down now, so have attempted to retrospectively justify it via their verbose justification (as you’ve aptly described it).
(Yes, it’s not entirely new but a much older word, which technically had fallen out of use, being brought back via slang and, possibly now, Monzo?)
I wonder if we get enough posts in this thread it can appear in The Telegraph.
Customers turn their backs on hipster bank Monzo, outraged by incorrect word usage. Are they to blame for the drop in our children’s literacy and education?
You jest but when it saw it, on the Monzo Plus signup page, it did viscerally irritate me!
This probably made me ever-so-slightly less likely to upgrade to Plus.
It’s a golden rule of marketing to never P*** off your customers!
I guess this is the hill that I choose to die on. People use the word therefore the word exists, it has a meaning. Its meaning fits the usage here.
Sure it may not be “established” and that will rub those who err on the side of tradition or the set way of doing things up the wrong way. You might think it’s not a bank’s place to not be following the set way of speaking/writing/communicating but again I think that’s an opinion baked in tradition.
I place no importance in tradition or doing things a certain way because that’s how they “must” or “should” be done. It’s as unnecessary to strike the new path as it is to stick to tradition so if the person who’s writing the content wants to use a newer word then just let them.
Worst case scenario you’ve learnt a new word.
Good talking though, I’m out.
Sure, I am definitely one of those people and I admit it!
Thanks for your contributions in the thread, it’s been a good discussion whichever side of the argument you come down on.
When it comes to communication, I think that’s it’s extremely important to communicate in terms that people readily understand.
Some areas of society write in confusing and elitist ways. Academia, for example. The legal profession. Financial Services have made progress in communication over the last couple of decades.
For a bank to communicate in a confusing way risks being divisive in that it excludes a number of their customers.
So where is the inclusion now? The inclusion that Monzo loves to market itself on? Instead, they use an incorrect word and then come up with some nonsense in an attempt to justify it.
It makes them look arrogant, I’m afraid. They think they’re better than everyone else, their tone of voice is condescending and they take gleeful delight in irritating customers through the use of a word that irks awkward and jars. At least, that’s the way it comes across.
I hate to bump this thread, but one of my colleagues was telling me how she was frauded recently.
It broke my heart to hear her say that, for more than one reason
Can I flag this as offensive? It triggers me.
Eye opening realisation though. I used to be one of the children. And I remember those adults this is mocking, of which I am now a member.
Worth remembering that, and keeping an open mind to these things; try not to become your childhood villain!
Change isn’t always necessarily better, or worse, just different. And if the next generation wishes to define fraud differently, I can support that!*
*When the definition in the dictionary is amended to reflect this sort of use!
Err, mods, how do I delete someone elses post?!
It really really baffles me to see Monzo making a big deal out of the less/fewer distinction:
They are, of course, right (or should that be correct? ) - but it’s one of those genuine language evolution things, and doesn’t affect meaning - unlike a certain made up word that I could mention…
It’s the inconsistency that does it for me. Worrying about things that don’t really matter and (in my view) fundamentally failing when it does.
So I was watching a TV show the other day, must have been made around 2005. It featured the word frauded. I had to smile as it reminded me about this topic
I take it all back.
To narrow it down to the show it was Silent Witness Season 9, either episode 5 or 6 (The Meaning of Death Part 1 or Part 2)