I read his introduction, and glanced over the first 3 articles.
It's written in a very heavy "government corporate" language. To be honest, who is the audience that this letter is supposed to reach?
People that can't read "government corporate" language are not going to even attempt to read it. It's a shame really because the message is a good one, but they need to change how they write if they don't want their message lost.
It's written in a very heavy "government corporate" language. To be honest, who is the audience that this letter is supposed to reach?
People that can't read "government corporate" language are not going to even attempt to read it. It's a shame really because the message is a good one, but they need to change how they write if they don't want their message lost.