
Tone of Voice Guide - PascLeRasc
https://monzo.com/tone-of-voice/
======
flixic
> In our technical work we use ‘allowlist’ and ‘blocklist’ instead of
> ‘whitelist’ and ‘blacklist.’ That’s because of the origin of these terms,
> with white being seen as ‘good’ and black being seen as ‘bad.’

This is one of these times where I'm confused about my own thinking, and am
seeking advice "what should I think?". I think "allowlist" and "blocklist" are
actually clearer, but I also struggle to accept that white/black, or
light/dark cannot be used as general symbols for good/bad.

Edit: this reddit question and a lengthy answer talks about the "origins" \--
they are not racial, and consistently meant allow/block:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/866ynp/what_...](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/866ynp/what_are_the_origins_of_the_words_blacklist_and/)

~~~
eat_veggies
Historically, white/blacklist did not have racial origins, but history is
always happening. The original intent of a word can be erased by its proximity
to new taboos and new circumstances, and in this case, white/black have been
racialized.

See also: the disappearance of the words "niggardly" and "feck" from common
English usage, or how Thais are uneasy using the word "fuk" (gourd, pumpkin)
[0]

[0] [https://sci-hub.tw/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198808190.013.10](https://sci-
hub.tw/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198808190.013.10)

~~~
throwanem
In our own industry, too, "master/slave" being gradually replaced by
"primary/replica", "primary/secondary", etc. There was a lot of similar red-
top-style complaining about "political correctness gone mad!" in the early
days of that change, too. Now the new terms are totally unremarkable, and it's
a real surprise to encounter the old.

As you say, history is always happening. My days of talking about "whitelists"
and "blacklists", modulo the occasional slip as I start modifying my lexical
habit, are done.

~~~
PaulDavisThe1st
Thanks for the reminder of this. In the last release of my software, we
renamed all the "slave" objects to be "masters", without any real thought to
the connected social implications.

------
yellowapple
Great article; will keep this in mind for my email/Slack messages at work.

One nitpick:

> The Romans arrived in Britain a couple of thousand years ago, and brought
> Latin with them. Local tribal leaders had to learn Latin, or else. So they
> did, and Latin became the language of religion and administration — which is
> why the words ‘religion’ and ‘administration’ come from Latin.

I'd argue the Normans have much more to do with that; the Romans might've
brought Latin with them, sure, but the Old English that came after the Romans
lost control was chiefly Germanic (especially considering prior
conquests/arrivals by the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes, all of whom spoke
Germanic languages). The much-more-recent Norman conquests are what
"Latinized" English, by enforcing French as the language of administration
(and Latin as the language of religion, as it was for as long as the Catholic
Church existed up until the Protestant Reformation made non-Latin languages
acceptable for church).

Further, at the time of the Roman conquest few (if any) people in what's now
England were speaking anything resembling English; the native peoples of the
British Isles were Celtic, and accordingly spoke a Celtic language, very
different from any Germanic language like English.

~~~
chrisdone
I agree. I read the same passage and had the same complaint.

I just finished a Great Courses lecture series on the Norman conquest of
England, and the professor makes this very comment. And also argues that the
melding of Norman--not 'French', Norman was a sister to Old French that looks
more like Vulgar Latin--and Old English is what gives modern English its vast
vocabulary, roughly twice the size of Spanish; as many words have the Germanic
and Romance varieties. You can 'meet' someone or 'encounter' someone, etc.

Ironically, "Norman" comes from "north men", as Normandy was settled by
Scandinavian invaders who "went native" in France. Then they "went native"
again in England, forgetting their original Norman.

~~~
yellowapple
> not 'French', Norman was a sister to Old French that looks more like Vulgar
> Latin

I mean, at that point in time it might as well be "French", right? Obviously
not modern French, but an ancestor (or uncle?) thereof.

I've done quite a bit of (amateur/casual) reading into the histories of
English and Norse languages, but the Norman part I haven't exactly dug into
yet (beyond exactly how it influenced modern English and induced a lot of the
differences from Old and Middle English) so now my curiosity's a bit piqued.

------
string
Some interesting thoughts but this aversion to the word "guys" needs to stop.
My wife uses it all the time to address both mixed and exclusively female
groups, it's completely gender neutral. If words like "guys" are causing
someone distress then there are obviously bigger issues we need to address.

It's also bizarre that this guide suggests avoiding colloquialisms and then
suggests using "y'all". I've never heard anyone in the UK say that outside of
attempting to imitate a Texan.

~~~
eat_veggies
I'm not so sure. To me, "How many guys have you slept with?" is a gendered
question.

> If words like "guys" are causing someone distress then there are obviously
> bigger issues we need to address.

Maybe this is true, but we can address the bigger issues while also making
sure people are comfortable in the meantime :) it's really not a big deal to
just avoid using a certain word if people don't like it.

~~~
MaxikCZ
> it's really not a big deal to just avoid using a certain word if people
> don't like it.

Okay, I say saying word veggies distresses me. Please stop using that word
everyone. eat_veggies distresses me the most, coz it implies that the word
veggies is used as healthy food, while I dont like eating healthy. I think its
offensive from you to tell me what to eat.

See? The problem with that kind of thinking is that anyone can declare
anything distressing. If we declare "guys" as distressing, and allow gradual
wiping of the word on that basis, where do we draw the line?

I think all the guys should take a breath, eat some veggies and start worrying
about other things, than if someone adressed them by word they dont like. I
seriously dont get this trend of validation of being ofended by most random
things.

~~~
CathedralBorrow
> See? The problem with that kind of thinking is that anyone can declare
> anything distressing.

True, but it tends to be quite easy to separate the real from the disingenuous
like yours. So that's there I draw the line at least.

------
DominikPeters
Some other style guides: [https://www.gov.uk/guidance/content-design/writing-
for-gov-u...](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/content-design/writing-for-gov-uk)
[https://service-manual.nhs.uk/content/how-we-write](https://service-
manual.nhs.uk/content/how-we-write)

------
Animats
The author recommends using emoji in writing. Not sure about that. Person to
person writing, such as texting, sure. One to many writing, maybe not. Twitter
supports emoji, but tweets seldom use them.

~~~
SideburnsOfDoom
> The author recommends using emoji in writing.

Not quite. They're saying "This is a ... overview of how we write" In other
words, when Monzo people want to sound like Monzo, they recommend using emoji
:)

It's not a universal recommendation, it's a brand identity. You do you.

------
matthewfelgate
This guide makes me happy because I need to understand companies quickly and
clearly, thanks for that.

------
nicbou
I follow similar practices on my website. I help people settle in Germany.
Since I can't assume people are native English speakers, I use simple english.
It's surprisingly hard. When I revisit old guides, I can notice how much I
have learned.

Struggling with German helped me become better at writing for those who
struggle with English.

I use Hemingway to spot long sentences, difficult words and other problems.

I also use text formatting and typography to great effect. It makes the text
easier to skim if you just need a specific piece of information.

Here are some of the things I learned:

* Put the short answer at the start, and highlight it. I try to make my content the opposite of clickbait.

* Use short, unambiguous sentences. Let readers catch their breath. Don't write sentences like Tarantino writes stories.

* Avoid idioms and expressions as much as possible.

* Use can/should/must exclusively.

------
antman
"The psychologist and linguist Steven Pinker has an idea called ‘the curse of
knowledge’.”

He didn’t have the idea originally, it is a generally accepted idea that
predates him and should better not be associated with Pinker’s feelgoodery
bias.

------
agentdrtran
This is a great resource, very well written.

------
totetsu
Living in country where English is not the first language has made me aware of
this kind of stuff all the time when I am writing. Particularly also, I have
the "what will google translate this to" check in the back of my mind.

------
bitwize
Now if they can only expunge "leverage" as a verb, except in the sense of
investing with borrowed capital.

------
IneffablePigeon
I love Monzo's tone of voice guide. We basically use it as our own, with a
couple of small tweaks.

------
PaulHoule
Man I found it hard to maintain that latinate tone when I was writing
scientific papers.

------
dr_dshiv
What is tone of voice? Any basic primers for the autistic?

