War of words: is it ‘flesh out’ or ‘flush out’?
The conflict revolves around the usage of a common phrase we hear in business meetings:
"Yes, we can fl_sh that out and report back to you at our meeting next week."
Was that, "flesh that out"? or "flush that out"?
People say it so fast! Maybe they slur it on purpose out of self doubt. Hmmm…
Our former marketing director chimed in on the topic one day, insistant that the correct usage is "flush."
We didn’t buy it. We were in the "flesh" camp. Then, a couple of days later, we were on a conference call with one of our big accounts, and heard them say, "Sounds great! We’ll flush this out and get back to you with the details."
That didn’t help matters. Our marketing director walked into our office after the call with a big "see, I told you so" smile on her face.
So we started asking everyone for their opinion. (and you are welcome to express yours if you are clearly on one side or the other…). The consensus was to go with "flesh it out." As in, adding meat to the bones.
And, so, we published last week’s newsletter with an article that had the phrase "…Flesh Out…" in its title.
Everything was hunky dory until today… when we received an email from Don. here’s what it said:
—
full_name: DON XXXXXXXXX
email_address: XXXXXXXXX@AOL.COM
message: HI GUYS,
I BELIEVE YOU MEANT "FLUSH" AND NOT "FLESH OUT"
IN YOUR LAST CORRESPONDENCE.
REGARDS,
DON
—
I circulated Don’s email to the team here and immediately the debate was back on!
Personally, we think the phrase should temporarily be changed to:
No vowels at all! Until, that is, someone can get us to the bottom line here…
September 8th, 2005 at 7:49 pm
Dictionary.com is your friend: [link=http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=flesh+out']flesh out[/link] vs
[link=http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=flush+out']flush out[/link]
September 9th, 2005 at 11:08 am
Google is your friend too: [link=http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/flesh.html' target='_blank']flesh out/flush out[/link]
September 13th, 2005 at 10:04 am
It depends on the context. "Flesh it out" refers to the fact that the idea is thin and that it needs more substance, i.e. "meat", i.e. flesh. "Flush it out" implies purging the idea because it is not promising, which is probably not the intended meaning given the context you described.
By the way, don’t get me started on "affected" versus "effected", nor on "insure" versus "ensure", either. English should not be a second language for native-born Americans. All too often, THEY’RE not sure if THEIR use of a word is correct for here or THERE.
September 13th, 2005 at 5:41 pm
‘Flesh out’ or ‘flush out’? I’m surprised there’s any debate at all. I’ve never heard ‘flush out’ used in that context. The dictionary.com and google related posts above should settle it. They reflect my understanding. As for ‘affected’ and ‘effected’, and ‘ensure’ and ‘insure’ I think I generally use those correctly. With those last two specifically, I think if you restrict ‘insure’ to just those cases where you really mean to indicate insurance of some kind or another, you’ll generally be alright. Except…gads(!) I Googled ‘Ensurance’, which I was just on the verge of pointing out isn’t a word…and I got sites that use it. What is up with that?
September 14th, 2005 at 7:04 am
I am in the "flesh" camp. Though both refer to a discovery of sorts.
I use "flesh" for ideas and rarely use "flush" outside of bird hunting. Flesh is a creative process, i.e., "lets give this more life, color, meat, paint a fence around it." Flush is more to uncover or eradicate something that is already there.
One can be creative in the flushing to be sure but, fleshing is purely a value-added prop. In other words,
Flesh - give life to. Create it.
Flush - bring to light. Identify it.
September 14th, 2005 at 2:39 pm
According to this site, there are definitely two meanings. If you flush, you are washing away the parts that don’t matter, if you flesh, you are adding meat to the bones…
[link=http://www.buzzwhack.com/buzzcomp/inddf.htm' target='_blank']http://www.buzzwhack.com/buzzcomp/inddf.htm[/link]
flush it out: Commonly misused by folks who actually mean "flesh it out." You flesh out an outline by adding details. In other words, you’re putting flesh on the skeleton. Also known as putting meat on the bones.
Nominated by Hal Dunn
September 17th, 2005 at 1:45 am
The correct term is: "flesh it out" More often than not the phrase is confused with "flush/flushing" This phrase is a derivative of an old english phrase relating to bird and/or fox hunting when it referred to bring an animal out in the open. Also, it predates "flushing" as in toilets.
September 17th, 2005 at 5:20 pm
One might …
FLESH out an idea.
(Add meat to the bones.)
FLUSH out the aging product line.
(Purge it.)
FLUSH out the culprits.
(Chase them from their hiding places. As a bird dog would do to expose the game birds.)
Also …
Use "better THAN", not "better THEN."
DOR
September 20th, 2005 at 2:44 am
Definitely "flesh out" - as in to put "meat" on a not-very-well developed idea.
Also it is "insistent" not "insistant" - with an "e"; not an "a".
September 21st, 2005 at 2:55 pm
good comment DOR!
September 21st, 2005 at 5:02 pm
Ensure generally means "to make certain".
Insure generally means the same as "ensure" but also adds additional meanings related to insurance - which "ensure" does not emcompass.
Assure has all of the above plus adds meanings of imparting confidence. (see http://www.hypedictionary.com).
So, being insured ensures one is assured …
September 23rd, 2005 at 3:34 pm
Interestingly enough, I just used the phrase "flesh out" in an e-mail right before I checked out this post!
I agree with DOR that the use of the word then in place of than happens by so many people so many times that it is alarming. What are they teaching in schools these days?
September 23rd, 2005 at 6:05 pm
This is too funny. I was just having an argument with a coworker over what the proper phrase was. I suggested we google the term "flesh it out" and see what pops up. Imagine our amazement at finding the first hit to be a link titled, "Is it "flesh out" or "flush out"? Is this a great planet or what?
September 23rd, 2005 at 6:22 pm
I think the 2nd entry, the one by Laura really is quite succinct and I agree with her completely; however, for those not yet convinced that there are a lot of people throwing around improperly worded comments, I present the results of my search in the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary:
[i]I first searched for Flesh-out, and low and behold, the term "Flesh-out" does exist…..[/i]
Main Entry: flesh out
Function: transitive verb
: to make fuller or more nearly complete <museums fleshing out their collections with borrowed works>
- fleshed-out adjective
[i]Then I tried Flush-out and this was the result….[/i]
The word you’ve entered isn’t in the dictionary. Click on a spelling suggestion below or try again using the search box to the right.
Suggestions for flush out:
1. flechette
2. fluctuat
3. fluctuate
4. …. You get the idea….
10. flowchart
[i]so I attempted again with just the word "Flush" and got these results…(Note I only selected the VERB meanings to correspond with "Flesh-out")[/i]
Main Entry: #1-flush
Pronunciation: ‘fl&sh
Function: verb
Etymology: Middle English flusshen
intransitive senses : to take wing suddenly
transitive senses
1 : to cause (a bird) to flush
2 : to expose or chase from a place of concealment <flushed the boys from their hiding place>
Main Entry: #4-flush
Function: verb
intransitive senses
1 : to flow and spread suddenly and freely
2 a : to glow brightly b : BLUSH
3 : to produce new growth <the plants flush twice during the year>
transitive senses
1 a : to cause to flow b : to pour liquid over or through; especially : to cleanse or wash out with or as if with a rush of liquid <flush the toilet> <flush the lungs with air>
2 : INFLAME, EXCITE — usually used passively <flushed with pride>
3 : to cause to blush
September 27th, 2005 at 2:04 pm
Speaking as a longtime professional writer (and instructor of writing), let me assure everyone that the proper term is "flesh out," as in adding substance to, adding meat to bones, or weight to a starving person, the concept being to add merit, wieght and substance to a proposal, idea, or argument.
"Flush out" is what little red sportscars that are speeding do to Highway Patrol Officers, hence the popular Cajun comment, "Go ‘head, bird dog, flush ‘em out!" In this sense,
it implies a chasing of hidden life-forms from their concealment, the way hunting dogs ‘flush’ game.
The ‘flush’ of plants, in the sense of blossoming, does not apply here, unless the people in question only come up with good ideas once or twice a season. Which may explain much, but that’s another story.
And the last meaning of ‘flush,’ to cleanse with a strong ‘head’ of water, is also a non sequitur. One does not perfect a viable idea by ‘flushing’ it.
Go with ‘flesh out’ and you’ll be correct.
Best regards,
Darlene
September 28th, 2005 at 4:52 pm
darlene,
basically, you’re amazing!!!
you’re going to get a big kick out of our next blog…
-sloan bros.
October 4th, 2005 at 7:06 pm
I vote for FLUSH…still
October 19th, 2005 at 6:08 pm
This website is a fabulous resource and presumptive authority on lexical minutae:
http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/errors.html
here is the Professor’s take on the "flesh out" subject:
http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/flesh.html
-Davey
October 20th, 2005 at 12:51 pm
Hi All,
The phrase "flesh out" in this instance is correct.
However, I prefer the verb "to elaborate", myself.
Discussions about grammar! Yay.
In that vein, I would like to get people’s thoughts on e-mail etiquette.
A colleague of mine received an e-mail with the greeting "Men". (that’s it, "men").
Since there were several female colleagues who were cc’d, I thought this was a highly inappropriate way to begin an inter-office correspondence. And, what ever happened to "Dear so and so.
Kim Banks
President
The Pet Set
Elegant Cards and Stationery For Our Fabulously Socialized Companions.
http://www.the-petset.com
201-225-1307
November 14th, 2005 at 3:45 pm
This has been driving me crazy for some time. Everyone, and I mean everyone in my professional and personal spheres, with the exception of my wife, says "flush it out," and they’re not talking about a toilet, but instead a proposal, or a specification, or a plan. What they mean is to add necessary detail to something that is high-level and non-detailed. They need to start using "flesh it out." No question.
Next on my hit list is the use of "jive" in place of "jibe" as in "your numbers don’t jive with mine."
December 8th, 2005 at 3:17 pm
I guess I AM the word geek . . . it’s definitely
FLESH. Putting meat on the bone. Adding substance
where there was just a skeleton of an idea.
I can think of only one decent argument for FLUSH, and
that would be "flushing" birds while hunting . . .
or making a bunch of them fly up from the brush. So
that, too, *could* be adding new information and ideas
. . . new birds.
But people talk about putting meat on the bone, and
not about having more birds fly by. And that just
makes more sense.
January 12th, 2006 at 6:12 pm
How about when you are going through the process of identifying issues in a process? Is is flush out, (since/sense) you are revealing hidden issues or is it flesh since you are progress or refining something? I’m sure flesh out is still the technically correct answer, but I think that is where the confusion comes in.
January 30th, 2006 at 10:49 am
Seems like a moot point to me (or as some idiots say … "a mute point")
February 5th, 2006 at 9:00 am
When you Flesh something out you are merely removing the additives and leaving the base you started with.
When you Flush something out you are actually getting rid of everything and starting over from scratch.
It’’s all about what fits the need.
Thanks
Yolanda
March 30th, 2006 at 5:00 pm
I am still back on "insistant."
March 30th, 2006 at 5:12 pm
I have to smile whenever a co-worker says one thing "equivocates" to another thing instead of "equates".
March 31st, 2006 at 12:46 pm
I can not believe how often this thread reappears. We have really fleshed out this idea…lol
April 7th, 2006 at 6:23 pm
flesh is skin, so why even start there? flush means to push out, as in move along, like in developing an idea, and flushing out all the pros and cons that go along with it.
And flesh just sounds too creapy. I think someone actuall knew it was flush, but decided to start their own phrase, and thought, hey, what about I change it to flesh? like I said, flesh is skin, and it is poor useage unless you work in a hospital, or a bio tech co that produces flesh.
May 3rd, 2006 at 10:25 am
My compliments to you guys for addressing this important issue.
Or, was that complements?
May 15th, 2006 at 9:16 am
I’d finally had it…I was about to email my boss and correct her (potentially career limiting). She consistently uses "flush" it out, when she means "flesh" it out…as in, "take these bullet points and flesh them out." Instead, I googled "flesh it out," and found this site. So instead of overtly insultinging her, I sent her the link to draw her own conclusions. Hopefully she’ll draw the right one!
May 15th, 2006 at 8:32 pm
tammy,
any progress with your boss?!
rich
May 31st, 2006 at 3:18 pm
That’s cute that these folks forced a debate out of this issue. A small amount of research would have uncovered their error. And unfortunately, the smug "I told you so grin" in inevitable here since more people use this phrase incorrectly than correctly. So use "flesh" proudly - and smile smugly knowing that you’re smarter than the rest of them.
June 8th, 2006 at 2:04 pm
It looks like this debate has been going on for a goodly while. I am trying to decide if I should tell my coworkers that they should be fleshing–not flushing. I decided to do a Google to get some counts. I really hate telling people the world is round when they have the fire, the rope, the stake, and the numbers on their side.
Even though I can imagine that someone may come up with a correct use of "flush out" — I figure not all that many plumbers and colonic specialists have Internet discourses. Frankly, I have never heard anyone other than the plumber or a car mechanic use "flush out" correctly (I am 57). In fact, I think using "flush out" correctly would be a very rare usage in other circumstance, although…we did flush out cloth diapers in the 1950’s. So, the Google showed:
2.9M "flesh out"
1.5M "flush out"
180K "flesh it out"
83K "flush it out"
(maybe the majority don’t use it wrong, Holly)
Well, even though I seem to be in the Internet majority, I do work with 8 guys who use it wrong and not even one who uses it right. I think I have to forget about telling them and flush the thought right out of my head.
June 12th, 2006 at 6:05 pm
As a recovering corporate junkie, I believe the terms are both used but for different purposes. Flush out was the old term to determine if something could go through the pipes anc come out without getting stuck or bogged down.
Flesh out was a more recent term assigned to the infamous "strawman" tool. Developing a strawman to validate a concept and then if every onoe likes the concept it would be fleshed out with structure (meat) and tendons, ligaments, etc(processes).
Dave Achtemeier
Action International Business Coaching
http://www.actioncoaching.com/dachtemeier
248-477-7688
June 14th, 2006 at 10:08 am
Why "flesh OUT"? If one is adding substance, or flesh, to a concept, why does the phrase end with the word "out"? It seems one would want to "flesh in" the details.
Then again, compare the phrases "fill out" and "fill in", which essentially indicate the same thing.
I think I’d like to vote for use of the phrases "flush out" (to stir up all the ’sediment’ and determine what to salvage and what to wash away) and "flesh in" (to fill in the details of a basic idea to create something more substantive).
August 29th, 2006 at 10:29 am
I believe it to be flesh it out. If I flush it out its gone and hopefully wont be coming back. Im in the flesh it out side of this one.
August 29th, 2006 at 6:58 pm
The english language, and the many dialects spoken around the world are ever evolving. They introduce new words officially into the english language regularly. They decide what words make it which ones don’t by determining the frequency of use, and a bunch of other factors and statistics surrounding the use and context.
So based on that, if enough people have been getting it wrong with "Flush out" instead of "Flesh out" for so long, wouldn’t "Flush-out" and Flesh out" used in that context be synonomous anyway??
Just a thought!
August 30th, 2006 at 1:10 pm
Following almost a year of reflection on this intriguing debate, I’ve come to what I think is the appropriate SuN Community conclusion - If you don’t take the time to properly "flesh out" your life plan and business plan, your chances of remaining "flush" with your business are greatly diminished.
November 21st, 2006 at 8:17 am
"Flesh out" is the only correct answer.
To flesh out my above comment, "fleshing out" means to give substance. The fact that the phrase is "flesh OUT" instead of "flesh IN" means little.
Flush out = To eliminate; to locate something by negating the factors that enable it to remain hidden
It appears as though this "debate" will flush out those individuals who have been saying the phrase incorrectly all along.
If people would flesh out their understanding of the English language, perhaps we would not have to debate something so obvious as this.
November 21st, 2006 at 5:41 pm
Oh JOY! Language snobs! I’m home, I’m home!
As others mentioned above, I raised this question at work with a co-worker who uses "Flush Out" when referring to gathering business requirements. I can certainly see the analogy to flushing out game birds. Sometimes you really have to beat the bushes to get complete and detailed requirements.
So I, too, was delighted to have this come up as the first ‘hit’ in my Google search (whose stock has just hit $500/share, incidentally). My faith in the usefulness of the internet is vindicated.
So: "Flesh" it is!
My language arrogance continues unabated!
February 8th, 2007 at 2:16 am
It seems that regardless of one’s position on the issue, one has to acknowledge that the origin of the term is idiomatic– which is to say that, whenever the phrase "fl_sh it out" was first used in reference to an idea, it was probably used in verbal rather than written communication, and that it probably constituted an elastic usage of either the word "flesh" or "flush". It used the word in a way the word had not been used before but which seemed valid to the user at the time, i.e., it communicated a specific meaning. If the term was used as "flesh it out"– i.e., put proverbial meat on the proverbial bones of a given thing– then it was an instance of verbing, using the noun "flesh" to refer to the process of making something insufficiently fleshy more flesh-like. If the term was used as "flush it out"– i.e., bring a given thing more clearly into the proverbial light– then it was an instance of metaphor, using a term previously used to refer to a hunting technique to refer to something more abstract. At present the two spellings are both commonly used, and they both refer to something so similar as to often overlap in meaning. If I want to flesh out an idea, I want to give it more substance. If I want to flush out an idea, I want to give an idea that sort of already exists a little more articulated reality. In terms of the creative process, the terms are practically interchangeable. However, one would never "flesh out" one’s adversaries, nor would one "flush out" the bullet points on a spread sheet.
February 16th, 2007 at 4:03 pm
One other aspect of flush is the coloration - "to flush red." In that sense, if you flushed out an idea you could be coloring in the details…
February 24th, 2007 at 2:10 am
Why can’t both be used? Flesh it out. Flush it out. Was having this very discussion with my roommate this evening when I used "Flush it out" and was informed that the correct usage was "Flesh it out." I work in creative advertising and hear (and use) this term over, and over. For me, "Flush it out" means to clean up the ideas. When you flush the toilet, you are getting rid of all the crap in the bowl. When I’m told this by my creative directors, I take it the same way. "Get rid of all the garbage so we can actually see an idea" Never heard of "Flesh it out" until this evening. Flushing out an idea could mean trying to clean it up, make it better, or, if it doesn’t work, starting over. I have the same issues with "Flesh it out." Why would you use anatomy to describe working on an idea when the bathroom analogy works just fine. Usually, the work is good, or it’s shitty.
Only one way to make it better… flush it out. Thanks for all the insight people. You rock!!!
February 28th, 2007 at 1:18 pm
It’s simple. Both are valid and useful. Context matters. Flush = clean out, Flesh = fill out.
Thanks for asking.
February 28th, 2007 at 9:34 pm
Since we’re at it, it’s, "I couldn’t care less." Not, "I could care less."
R-
March 18th, 2007 at 2:28 pm
I also assure everyone that it is "flesh out" when you’re talking about ideas.
However, "flush out" would be acceptable when you need to come up with an idea, as in:
"We need a way to drive sales from the website - let’s get together and flush out an idea."
In the same way as one would flush out a criminal from a hiding place. If the idea does not yet exist, I think it’s acceptable to "flush it out."
If there is the beginning of an idea, it’s DEFINITELY "flesh."
March 23rd, 2007 at 3:54 pm
I had never heard of "flesh out" until a few minutes ago… interesting.
I have always used "flush out" to mean reveal or bring into plain sight, as in "We’ve had lots of conversation but we need to site down and flush out the requirements".
March 24th, 2007 at 8:25 am
I was talking to my colleague last week and I corrected him when he said "flush" it out. He pushed back at first and said "no it’s flush" but I was confident and he sort of sheepishly conceded. There were 4 or 5 other people there and none of them said anything because I don’t think anyone knows what the right word is. I’m obligated to "flesh it out" now though.
April 25th, 2007 at 5:02 pm
Basically I see "flush out" as a corruption of "flesh out" that evolved through verbal communication. It’s certainly not a term you’ll see in many books, if you happen to be a reader. I started to hear it about 10 years ago or so in business, and it crops up often now, especially among people who are 35 years old or younger.
It’s clearly incorrect. Flesh out means to put meat on the bones. So if you are brainstorming about an idea, you are fleshing it out by adding shape and detail. Check out http://www.thefreedictionary.com/flesh+out
Someone mentioned flush out as in dogs flushing pheasants out of a thicket. That usage makes sense but I don’t buy the idea that by flushing out something hidden, you can somehow extrapolate the expression to bringing out more details. Also I associate "flushing out" with driving water forcefully through pipes to clean them out. Do you come up with ideas by flushing them away? Do you flush ideas out of the room when you brainstorm? The analogy doesn’t hold.
August 20th, 2007 at 10:45 am
I don’t understand what all the fuss is. We always used "flush out" when interpreting poetry or literature in the sense of "unpacking" the meaning of something. If an idea or notion was vague, elusive or confusing we’d say "flush it out."
This is a great link if you ever have any questions like this in future:
http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/flesh.html
September 1st, 2007 at 8:10 pm
Allow me to add a third option. In some contexts, both FLESH and FULSH are incorrect. I submit the word FLESCH for the cognoscenti out there.
When one is asked to "flesch out" a difficult concept or to flesch out the meaning of poetry, one is not asked to add anything (as in more meat or flesh to the bones) but rather to distill and discern its essential meaning and express it it clear, simple and understandable terms.
I submit that the proper word in this example is FLESCH, named after Rudolf Flesch, author, language consultant and readability expert who co-developed the Flesch-Kinkaid readability test. He was a proponent of plain English communication. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Flesch
Flesch is the one apparently responsible for the Associated Press Writing Manual. See http://www.conversationalreading.com/2004/10/strunk_white_fl.html
I agree that if one begins with a nascent concept and desires the input of others to further define its breadth and fully develop its potential, flesh must be added to the skeleton. In that case, fleshing it out would be appropriate.
On the other hand, I would not seek to flesh out Einstein’s theory of relativity and further add to its complexity. I just wish someone would flesch it out for me so I can understand it.
September 21st, 2007 at 1:24 am
Wow! I can’t believe this discussion has been going on for two years! I need to go ‘lay’ down!
October 11th, 2007 at 9:58 am
You can flesh out an idea to flush out the details. Go lay yourself down as you look like you need it.
December 17th, 2007 at 10:24 am
Both are correct, depending on your meaning…
From a WSU website:
http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/flesh.html
To “flesh out” an idea is to give it substance, as a sculptor adds clay flesh to a skeletal armature. To “flush out” a criminal is to drive him or her out into the open. The latter term is derived from bird-hunting, in which one flushes out a covey of quail. If you are trying to develop something further, use “flesh”; but if you are trying to reveal something hitherto concealed, use “flush.”
December 18th, 2007 at 3:44 pm
Flushed out.
January 2nd, 2008 at 8:11 pm
I just had my former boss send me this link when I emailed him to see what he used since he’s a Wharton guy and very aware of business protocol. He, my current boss, and most of the above postings have swayed me to not use ‘flush out’, which I say all of the time, but "flesh out" simply sounds gross. So I have to replace "flush out" with something all together different. Suggestions? It’s what I do all day, every day - take either existing processes and streamline them or develop new ones and move them (or "flush" them) through the existing processes. What would you call that?
January 4th, 2008 at 4:56 pm
Given the slaughter of the English language, the example isn’t clear as to what is really meant, so both may be right and both may be wrong. Let’s focus on the truly important issues like 0 percent financing! ;-)If people would simply learn how to spell and write using proper grammar again, we’d all be in much better shape with customers and co-workers (not to mention our children). The difference between a "u" or an "e" in this context is absurd. I’d rather proof the actual report.
March 7th, 2008 at 8:03 pm
Sorry but this is a no brainer unlike some other colloquialisms we use that are too old to figure out its origin. To Flesh out an idea, means to build up from the stick figure framework that we started with, to flesh it out, and give it life.
To flush something out, always connotes, to stir it from its resting place, like a bird is flushed out of its hiding place, or how we can fill a bottle with water and flush out the residue of something.
April 29th, 2008 at 6:32 pm
I have to deal with this everywhere I go: http://www.adhole.com/?p=4
June 16th, 2008 at 2:40 am
I’ve seen this problem a lot being an Aussie working in an American company. I have observed Americans often hearing a phrase and copying it/using it without really stopping to think what it means. Other examples are: “out of pocket” (short on cash, or where a cash expense is funded) being used when someone is out of the office on leave. Another one is “premise” (the basis of an argument) being used to mean “premises” (grounds, a site, etc) which apparently also came from a misuse or bastardisation of the headings from property title deeds (look up the etymology for the details).
June 16th, 2008 at 2:54 am
… and now I should probably apologise to all the Americans who get it right and acknowledge there are probably a heap of Aussies who get it wrong too before I get completely flamed