> perpendicularly misaligned
Um. Perpendicular lines intersect at some point.
Parallel lines never touch, maybe that’s a better geometric analogy.
Of course, for most people things that are “parallel” would seem to be in close agreement.
> perpendicularly misaligned
Um. Perpendicular lines intersect at some point.
Parallel lines never touch, maybe that’s a better geometric analogy.
Of course, for most people things that are “parallel” would seem to be in close agreement.
> Um. Perpendicular lines intersect at some point.
Unless you are trying to screw your loyal users in 3 or more dimensions which seems to be the case here
> Unless you are trying to screw your loyal users in 3 or more dimensions which seems to be the case here
That made me chuckle ... good one
Right - sorry, my pattern suggests 2-dimensional thinking.
> Parallel lines never touch, maybe that’s a better geometric analogy.
I do believe the OP meant to say that the incentives are orthogonal (i.e., misaligned, or 90deg to each other), and perpendicularly misaligned is a close fit.
Not sure why folks felt you should be downvoted for an heartfelt comment, an explanation is a much better feedback. Downvotes are counterproductive, IMO, if you're trying to have a debate or come to a meeting of minds, so I almost never use them anymore, except for where I detect ill-intentions.