What is the proper usage of the term “we used enough due diligence for preparation”? “Duplicate”?
What is
the proper usage of the phrase “due diligence”?
Is there a way to ask a question that seems to be similar to mine? I don’t think some of my friends used due diligence to research a course awaiting the test. Is that true? Is it unfair?
After some short research on the proper definition of “diligence” and the meaning of the term/phrase “due diligence”, I’m still convinced that she is incorrect in her usage. What is your opinion on Avaaz’s response to my question? From a distance, keep in mind that Emma is becoming very arrogant and trying to seem more intelligent than her. Keep in mind that she was probably thinking that if she were to be a less well-outspoken person, she would not look like the person she is targeting.
Why was this unintentionally wrong usage? I’m trying to build up an arsenal here so that I am 100% correct once I correct her.
I’m hoping to be 100% correct once I correct her.
I don’t see any semantic value was added to the sentence by including the word “due” and am inclined to infer it was included to further reputation, rather than communication.
“Due diligence” originally meant “necessary diligence” or perhaps “expected diligence”, and “due” expressed that a certain amount was required to satisfy a legal process: the amount of effort necessary. When one bills a debtor, the amount of money to pay or payment to settle the debtor is taken out, or there’s interest, the amount of money gets received. What is Wikipedia’s best introduction?
You are probably correct to say that you cannot have “enough due diligence.” It either have the due amount (you have exercised sufficient diligence in your preparation), or you don’t.
We have yet to see evidence of that use of the term “due diligence”. Why refers to “sufficient” does not mean “necessary”?
How you can communicate with a friend and why?
That said, I think the new usage is regrettable, and it’s not a pretty turn of phrase.
I don’t see any semantic value was added to the sentence by including the word “due” and am inclined to infer it was included to further reputation, rather than communication.
“Due diligence” originally meant “necessary diligence” or perhaps “expected diligence”, and “due” expressed that a certain amount was required to satisfy a legal process: the amount of effort necessary. When one bills a debtor, the amount of money to pay or payment to settle the debtor is taken out, or there’s interest, the amount of money gets received. What is Wikipedia’s best introduction?
You are probably correct to say that you cannot have “enough due diligence.” It either have the due amount (you have exercised sufficient diligence in your preparation), or you don’t.
We have yet to see evidence of that use of the term “due diligence”. Why refers to “sufficient” does not mean “necessary”?
How you can communicate with a friend and why?
That said, I think the new usage is regrettable, and it’s not a pretty turn of phrase.
I don’t see any semantic value was added to the sentence by including the word “due” and am inclined to infer it was included to further reputation, rather than communication.
I don’t see any semantic value was added to the sentence by including the word “due” and am inclined to infer it was included to further reputation, rather than communication.
I don’t see any semantic value was added to the sentence by including the word “due” and am inclined to infer it was included to further reputation, rather than communication.
I don’t see any semantic value was added to the sentence by including the word “due” and am inclined to infer it was included to further reputation, rather than communication.
I don’t see any semantic value was added to the sentence by including the word “due” and am inclined to infer it was included to further reputation, rather than communication.
I don’t see any semantic value was added to the sentence by including the word “due” and am inclined to infer it was included to further reputation, rather than communication.
