Tell HN: I didn't get a job due to a failed startup on my resume

Re:Tell HN: I didn't get a job due to a failed startup on my... by likpok on Sunday April 12, 2009 @10:04PM (#559260)

To flush out this point, consider that hiring someone is not free. There can be significant costs of hiring someone who performs poorly (opportunity cost, training overhead, lost work).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Tell HN: I didn't get a job due to a failed startup on my... by devin on Monday April 13, 2009 @06:28AM (#559631)

Not to be a grammar nazi, but I think you mean 'flesh'. "Flushing" something out sounds toilet-related. Gross.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Tell HN: I didn't get a job due to a failed startup on my... by leftcoaster on Monday April 13, 2009 @10:37AM (#559813)

Grammar is about sentence structure; your point is about word choice, otherwise known as "diction."

And "flush" is perfectly correct. Used transitively, it means "to expose or chase from a place of concealment." Example: "the hunters used dogs to flush their game from the bushes."

In figurative language, "flush" is a good choice when you're talking about stripping away extraneous information. "Flesh" is used when you're proposing to add more information, as in putting flesh onto bones.

I should add that I'm only addressing your claim that "flush" is inherently scatalogical, not whether the original use was valid.

[ Parent | on HN ]