Phrase for the opposite of “foolproof”What's the opposite for “steep learning curve”?What is a better way to name “The Wrong Question”?A word or phrase meaning the opposite action of embeddingWhat's the opposite of “from the outside”?Word or phrase for the heir's heirA phrase for the opposite of “getting over” somethingWord or Phrase for Identical Twins with Opposite Personalities?Term for being unable to see glaring errors after working for some time on a task?Alternative for the phrase “in a word”Is there an opposite phrase for “The apple never falls far from the tree”?

Can someone publish a story that happened to you?

Critique of timeline aesthetic

Is it idiomatic to construct against `this`

What are the steps to solving this definite integral?

What happens to Mjolnir (Thor's hammer) at the end of Endgame?

How to fry ground beef so it is well-browned

Does tea made with boiling water cool faster than tea made with boiled (but still hot) water?

Map of water taps to fill bottles

Can SQL Server create collisions in system generated constraint names?

What does the integral of a function times a function of a random variable represent, conceptually?

Overlay of two functions leaves gaps

How did Captain America manage to do this?

Like totally amazing interchangeable sister outfits II: The Revenge

Who was the lone kid in the line of people at the lake at the end of Avengers: Endgame?

Coordinate my way to the name of the (video) game

Why was the Spitfire's elliptical wing almost uncopied by other aircraft of World War 2?

Does a large simulator bay have standard public address announcements?

How to have a sharp product image?

What does ゆーか mean?

How can Republicans who favour free markets, consistently express anger when they don't like the outcome of that choice?

Are there physical dangers to preparing a prepared piano?

Betweenness centrality formula

Is there any official lore on the Far Realm?

Can I criticise the more senior developers around me for not writing clean code?



Phrase for the opposite of “foolproof”


What's the opposite for “steep learning curve”?What is a better way to name “The Wrong Question”?A word or phrase meaning the opposite action of embeddingWhat's the opposite of “from the outside”?Word or phrase for the heir's heirA phrase for the opposite of “getting over” somethingWord or Phrase for Identical Twins with Opposite Personalities?Term for being unable to see glaring errors after working for some time on a task?Alternative for the phrase “in a word”Is there an opposite phrase for “The apple never falls far from the tree”?






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








1















Is there a concise way to describe something that is poorly designed, such that users are likely to accidentally make errors when using it? I'm looking for pretty much an exact antonym for "foolproof".



As an example, suppose there's a UI for job management that allows jobs to be canceled. When the "Cancel" button is clicked, a dialog appears saying "Canceling will lose job progress. Do you want to let the job finish? [Yes] / [No]" Clicking "No" will actually abort the job. The UI is working as designed, but since many users will not read the full message and assume that the opposite question is being asked, they are likely to use it incorrectly and mistakenly choose the wrong option. The UI itself works as intended and is not directly failing or causing the error, but its design is causing others to make mistakes.



I'd like a concise yet generalizable way to say, "This UI is [likely to be the cause of frequent user error]." So far the best word that I have is "confusing" but I'd like something stronger and more specific.



"Error-prone" is close, but I feel like that more strongly means "liable to make mistakes" instead of "cause mistakes to be made."



I'm not satisfied with the following words, because they suggest a defect of implementation (that it can fail even if used "correctly") and don't sufficiently convey an error-causing design: "defective", "faulty", "flawed", "imperfect", "undependable", "unreliable", "fallible"



I would also like to avoid direct or implicit criticism of the creator, so I don't want to say "poorly designed."










share|improve this question
























  • Not what you're looking for, I'm sure, but I can't resist suggesting "foolhardy".

    – Hot Licks
    5 hours ago











  • This UI is a disaster waiting to happen

    – Jim
    4 hours ago











  • I think I would go with your own phrase: "This UI is [confusing and] likely to be the cause of frequent user error."

    – James Random
    3 hours ago











  • The designer has left ample room for improvement.

    – Jim
    14 mins ago

















1















Is there a concise way to describe something that is poorly designed, such that users are likely to accidentally make errors when using it? I'm looking for pretty much an exact antonym for "foolproof".



As an example, suppose there's a UI for job management that allows jobs to be canceled. When the "Cancel" button is clicked, a dialog appears saying "Canceling will lose job progress. Do you want to let the job finish? [Yes] / [No]" Clicking "No" will actually abort the job. The UI is working as designed, but since many users will not read the full message and assume that the opposite question is being asked, they are likely to use it incorrectly and mistakenly choose the wrong option. The UI itself works as intended and is not directly failing or causing the error, but its design is causing others to make mistakes.



I'd like a concise yet generalizable way to say, "This UI is [likely to be the cause of frequent user error]." So far the best word that I have is "confusing" but I'd like something stronger and more specific.



"Error-prone" is close, but I feel like that more strongly means "liable to make mistakes" instead of "cause mistakes to be made."



I'm not satisfied with the following words, because they suggest a defect of implementation (that it can fail even if used "correctly") and don't sufficiently convey an error-causing design: "defective", "faulty", "flawed", "imperfect", "undependable", "unreliable", "fallible"



I would also like to avoid direct or implicit criticism of the creator, so I don't want to say "poorly designed."










share|improve this question
























  • Not what you're looking for, I'm sure, but I can't resist suggesting "foolhardy".

    – Hot Licks
    5 hours ago











  • This UI is a disaster waiting to happen

    – Jim
    4 hours ago











  • I think I would go with your own phrase: "This UI is [confusing and] likely to be the cause of frequent user error."

    – James Random
    3 hours ago











  • The designer has left ample room for improvement.

    – Jim
    14 mins ago













1












1








1








Is there a concise way to describe something that is poorly designed, such that users are likely to accidentally make errors when using it? I'm looking for pretty much an exact antonym for "foolproof".



As an example, suppose there's a UI for job management that allows jobs to be canceled. When the "Cancel" button is clicked, a dialog appears saying "Canceling will lose job progress. Do you want to let the job finish? [Yes] / [No]" Clicking "No" will actually abort the job. The UI is working as designed, but since many users will not read the full message and assume that the opposite question is being asked, they are likely to use it incorrectly and mistakenly choose the wrong option. The UI itself works as intended and is not directly failing or causing the error, but its design is causing others to make mistakes.



I'd like a concise yet generalizable way to say, "This UI is [likely to be the cause of frequent user error]." So far the best word that I have is "confusing" but I'd like something stronger and more specific.



"Error-prone" is close, but I feel like that more strongly means "liable to make mistakes" instead of "cause mistakes to be made."



I'm not satisfied with the following words, because they suggest a defect of implementation (that it can fail even if used "correctly") and don't sufficiently convey an error-causing design: "defective", "faulty", "flawed", "imperfect", "undependable", "unreliable", "fallible"



I would also like to avoid direct or implicit criticism of the creator, so I don't want to say "poorly designed."










share|improve this question
















Is there a concise way to describe something that is poorly designed, such that users are likely to accidentally make errors when using it? I'm looking for pretty much an exact antonym for "foolproof".



As an example, suppose there's a UI for job management that allows jobs to be canceled. When the "Cancel" button is clicked, a dialog appears saying "Canceling will lose job progress. Do you want to let the job finish? [Yes] / [No]" Clicking "No" will actually abort the job. The UI is working as designed, but since many users will not read the full message and assume that the opposite question is being asked, they are likely to use it incorrectly and mistakenly choose the wrong option. The UI itself works as intended and is not directly failing or causing the error, but its design is causing others to make mistakes.



I'd like a concise yet generalizable way to say, "This UI is [likely to be the cause of frequent user error]." So far the best word that I have is "confusing" but I'd like something stronger and more specific.



"Error-prone" is close, but I feel like that more strongly means "liable to make mistakes" instead of "cause mistakes to be made."



I'm not satisfied with the following words, because they suggest a defect of implementation (that it can fail even if used "correctly") and don't sufficiently convey an error-causing design: "defective", "faulty", "flawed", "imperfect", "undependable", "unreliable", "fallible"



I would also like to avoid direct or implicit criticism of the creator, so I don't want to say "poorly designed."







phrase-requests






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 4 hours ago









MikeJRamsey56

2,249315




2,249315










asked 5 hours ago









MilesMiles

66046




66046












  • Not what you're looking for, I'm sure, but I can't resist suggesting "foolhardy".

    – Hot Licks
    5 hours ago











  • This UI is a disaster waiting to happen

    – Jim
    4 hours ago











  • I think I would go with your own phrase: "This UI is [confusing and] likely to be the cause of frequent user error."

    – James Random
    3 hours ago











  • The designer has left ample room for improvement.

    – Jim
    14 mins ago

















  • Not what you're looking for, I'm sure, but I can't resist suggesting "foolhardy".

    – Hot Licks
    5 hours ago











  • This UI is a disaster waiting to happen

    – Jim
    4 hours ago











  • I think I would go with your own phrase: "This UI is [confusing and] likely to be the cause of frequent user error."

    – James Random
    3 hours ago











  • The designer has left ample room for improvement.

    – Jim
    14 mins ago
















Not what you're looking for, I'm sure, but I can't resist suggesting "foolhardy".

– Hot Licks
5 hours ago





Not what you're looking for, I'm sure, but I can't resist suggesting "foolhardy".

– Hot Licks
5 hours ago













This UI is a disaster waiting to happen

– Jim
4 hours ago





This UI is a disaster waiting to happen

– Jim
4 hours ago













I think I would go with your own phrase: "This UI is [confusing and] likely to be the cause of frequent user error."

– James Random
3 hours ago





I think I would go with your own phrase: "This UI is [confusing and] likely to be the cause of frequent user error."

– James Random
3 hours ago













The designer has left ample room for improvement.

– Jim
14 mins ago





The designer has left ample room for improvement.

– Jim
14 mins ago










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















2














This UI is:

- Nonobvious = Not easily discovered, seen, or understood

- Unclear = not clear

- Counterintuitive = contrary to what one would intuitively expect

- Illogical = not observing the principles of logic



It is difficult to correct someone without risking direct or implicit criticism.






share|improve this answer























  • "Counter-intuitive" would seem to be a very good fit.

    – Cascabel
    4 hours ago


















1














inherently flawed




Inherent literally refers to something that is "stuck in" something else so firmly that they can't be separated. A plan may have an inherent flaw that will cause it to fail; a person may have inherent virtues that everyone admires. Since the flaw and the virtues can't be removed, the plan may simply have to be thrown out and the person will remain virtuous forever.




-Merriam Webster



So if the UI is inherently flawed it refers to the design and not the designer.






share|improve this answer

























  • I know the OP said that "flawed" was not adequate for their purpose, I think when accompanied by "inherently" it can work.

    – Cascabel
    5 hours ago











  • The term does refer to the design, but I disagree that this option makes no judgement of the designer. Whoever designed an inherently flawed UI did a damn poor job.

    – Nuclear Wang
    5 hours ago











  • @NuclearWang ...of course that would be inferred...but not actually implied.

    – Cascabel
    5 hours ago



















0














I read the title of the question and immediately thought of error prone—before reading the rest of the question. I personally don't think there is a better phrase than that. It's open to interpretation and context what the reason is behind the possible errors.




Having said that, another possible word is fallible:




1 : liable to be erroneous

// a fallible generalization
2 : capable of making a mistake

// we're all fallible




In short:




The UI is fallible.







share|improve this answer























  • Isn't it more a case that the UI leads the user to be more fallible? Error prone may be better.

    – James Random
    3 hours ago






  • 1





    @JamesRandom I did say that error prone seems like the best choice. ;) But the problem with the question comes from the source of the error. If the question doesn't want to admit poor design or user error (of any kind), it's not clear what the opposite of foolproof could possibly be—because something has to produce an error of some kind . . .

    – Jason Bassford
    2 hours ago



















0















Misleading




Giving the wrong idea or impression - OOD



A confirmation pop-up is expected to ask if the user wants to continue. When it asks the negation of what is expected many people can be expected to answer incorrectly.






share|improve this answer























  • ISN’T IT CONFUSING? YES, IT ISN’T.

    – MikeJRamsey56
    4 hours ago











Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);













draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f496322%2fphrase-for-the-opposite-of-foolproof%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes








4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









2














This UI is:

- Nonobvious = Not easily discovered, seen, or understood

- Unclear = not clear

- Counterintuitive = contrary to what one would intuitively expect

- Illogical = not observing the principles of logic



It is difficult to correct someone without risking direct or implicit criticism.






share|improve this answer























  • "Counter-intuitive" would seem to be a very good fit.

    – Cascabel
    4 hours ago















2














This UI is:

- Nonobvious = Not easily discovered, seen, or understood

- Unclear = not clear

- Counterintuitive = contrary to what one would intuitively expect

- Illogical = not observing the principles of logic



It is difficult to correct someone without risking direct or implicit criticism.






share|improve this answer























  • "Counter-intuitive" would seem to be a very good fit.

    – Cascabel
    4 hours ago













2












2








2







This UI is:

- Nonobvious = Not easily discovered, seen, or understood

- Unclear = not clear

- Counterintuitive = contrary to what one would intuitively expect

- Illogical = not observing the principles of logic



It is difficult to correct someone without risking direct or implicit criticism.






share|improve this answer













This UI is:

- Nonobvious = Not easily discovered, seen, or understood

- Unclear = not clear

- Counterintuitive = contrary to what one would intuitively expect

- Illogical = not observing the principles of logic



It is difficult to correct someone without risking direct or implicit criticism.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered 5 hours ago









David DDavid D

4124




4124












  • "Counter-intuitive" would seem to be a very good fit.

    – Cascabel
    4 hours ago

















  • "Counter-intuitive" would seem to be a very good fit.

    – Cascabel
    4 hours ago
















"Counter-intuitive" would seem to be a very good fit.

– Cascabel
4 hours ago





"Counter-intuitive" would seem to be a very good fit.

– Cascabel
4 hours ago













1














inherently flawed




Inherent literally refers to something that is "stuck in" something else so firmly that they can't be separated. A plan may have an inherent flaw that will cause it to fail; a person may have inherent virtues that everyone admires. Since the flaw and the virtues can't be removed, the plan may simply have to be thrown out and the person will remain virtuous forever.




-Merriam Webster



So if the UI is inherently flawed it refers to the design and not the designer.






share|improve this answer

























  • I know the OP said that "flawed" was not adequate for their purpose, I think when accompanied by "inherently" it can work.

    – Cascabel
    5 hours ago











  • The term does refer to the design, but I disagree that this option makes no judgement of the designer. Whoever designed an inherently flawed UI did a damn poor job.

    – Nuclear Wang
    5 hours ago











  • @NuclearWang ...of course that would be inferred...but not actually implied.

    – Cascabel
    5 hours ago
















1














inherently flawed




Inherent literally refers to something that is "stuck in" something else so firmly that they can't be separated. A plan may have an inherent flaw that will cause it to fail; a person may have inherent virtues that everyone admires. Since the flaw and the virtues can't be removed, the plan may simply have to be thrown out and the person will remain virtuous forever.




-Merriam Webster



So if the UI is inherently flawed it refers to the design and not the designer.






share|improve this answer

























  • I know the OP said that "flawed" was not adequate for their purpose, I think when accompanied by "inherently" it can work.

    – Cascabel
    5 hours ago











  • The term does refer to the design, but I disagree that this option makes no judgement of the designer. Whoever designed an inherently flawed UI did a damn poor job.

    – Nuclear Wang
    5 hours ago











  • @NuclearWang ...of course that would be inferred...but not actually implied.

    – Cascabel
    5 hours ago














1












1








1







inherently flawed




Inherent literally refers to something that is "stuck in" something else so firmly that they can't be separated. A plan may have an inherent flaw that will cause it to fail; a person may have inherent virtues that everyone admires. Since the flaw and the virtues can't be removed, the plan may simply have to be thrown out and the person will remain virtuous forever.




-Merriam Webster



So if the UI is inherently flawed it refers to the design and not the designer.






share|improve this answer















inherently flawed




Inherent literally refers to something that is "stuck in" something else so firmly that they can't be separated. A plan may have an inherent flaw that will cause it to fail; a person may have inherent virtues that everyone admires. Since the flaw and the virtues can't be removed, the plan may simply have to be thrown out and the person will remain virtuous forever.




-Merriam Webster



So if the UI is inherently flawed it refers to the design and not the designer.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 5 hours ago

























answered 5 hours ago









CascabelCascabel

8,27662957




8,27662957












  • I know the OP said that "flawed" was not adequate for their purpose, I think when accompanied by "inherently" it can work.

    – Cascabel
    5 hours ago











  • The term does refer to the design, but I disagree that this option makes no judgement of the designer. Whoever designed an inherently flawed UI did a damn poor job.

    – Nuclear Wang
    5 hours ago











  • @NuclearWang ...of course that would be inferred...but not actually implied.

    – Cascabel
    5 hours ago


















  • I know the OP said that "flawed" was not adequate for their purpose, I think when accompanied by "inherently" it can work.

    – Cascabel
    5 hours ago











  • The term does refer to the design, but I disagree that this option makes no judgement of the designer. Whoever designed an inherently flawed UI did a damn poor job.

    – Nuclear Wang
    5 hours ago











  • @NuclearWang ...of course that would be inferred...but not actually implied.

    – Cascabel
    5 hours ago

















I know the OP said that "flawed" was not adequate for their purpose, I think when accompanied by "inherently" it can work.

– Cascabel
5 hours ago





I know the OP said that "flawed" was not adequate for their purpose, I think when accompanied by "inherently" it can work.

– Cascabel
5 hours ago













The term does refer to the design, but I disagree that this option makes no judgement of the designer. Whoever designed an inherently flawed UI did a damn poor job.

– Nuclear Wang
5 hours ago





The term does refer to the design, but I disagree that this option makes no judgement of the designer. Whoever designed an inherently flawed UI did a damn poor job.

– Nuclear Wang
5 hours ago













@NuclearWang ...of course that would be inferred...but not actually implied.

– Cascabel
5 hours ago






@NuclearWang ...of course that would be inferred...but not actually implied.

– Cascabel
5 hours ago












0














I read the title of the question and immediately thought of error prone—before reading the rest of the question. I personally don't think there is a better phrase than that. It's open to interpretation and context what the reason is behind the possible errors.




Having said that, another possible word is fallible:




1 : liable to be erroneous

// a fallible generalization
2 : capable of making a mistake

// we're all fallible




In short:




The UI is fallible.







share|improve this answer























  • Isn't it more a case that the UI leads the user to be more fallible? Error prone may be better.

    – James Random
    3 hours ago






  • 1





    @JamesRandom I did say that error prone seems like the best choice. ;) But the problem with the question comes from the source of the error. If the question doesn't want to admit poor design or user error (of any kind), it's not clear what the opposite of foolproof could possibly be—because something has to produce an error of some kind . . .

    – Jason Bassford
    2 hours ago
















0














I read the title of the question and immediately thought of error prone—before reading the rest of the question. I personally don't think there is a better phrase than that. It's open to interpretation and context what the reason is behind the possible errors.




Having said that, another possible word is fallible:




1 : liable to be erroneous

// a fallible generalization
2 : capable of making a mistake

// we're all fallible




In short:




The UI is fallible.







share|improve this answer























  • Isn't it more a case that the UI leads the user to be more fallible? Error prone may be better.

    – James Random
    3 hours ago






  • 1





    @JamesRandom I did say that error prone seems like the best choice. ;) But the problem with the question comes from the source of the error. If the question doesn't want to admit poor design or user error (of any kind), it's not clear what the opposite of foolproof could possibly be—because something has to produce an error of some kind . . .

    – Jason Bassford
    2 hours ago














0












0








0







I read the title of the question and immediately thought of error prone—before reading the rest of the question. I personally don't think there is a better phrase than that. It's open to interpretation and context what the reason is behind the possible errors.




Having said that, another possible word is fallible:




1 : liable to be erroneous

// a fallible generalization
2 : capable of making a mistake

// we're all fallible




In short:




The UI is fallible.







share|improve this answer













I read the title of the question and immediately thought of error prone—before reading the rest of the question. I personally don't think there is a better phrase than that. It's open to interpretation and context what the reason is behind the possible errors.




Having said that, another possible word is fallible:




1 : liable to be erroneous

// a fallible generalization
2 : capable of making a mistake

// we're all fallible




In short:




The UI is fallible.








share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered 5 hours ago









Jason BassfordJason Bassford

21.5k32753




21.5k32753












  • Isn't it more a case that the UI leads the user to be more fallible? Error prone may be better.

    – James Random
    3 hours ago






  • 1





    @JamesRandom I did say that error prone seems like the best choice. ;) But the problem with the question comes from the source of the error. If the question doesn't want to admit poor design or user error (of any kind), it's not clear what the opposite of foolproof could possibly be—because something has to produce an error of some kind . . .

    – Jason Bassford
    2 hours ago


















  • Isn't it more a case that the UI leads the user to be more fallible? Error prone may be better.

    – James Random
    3 hours ago






  • 1





    @JamesRandom I did say that error prone seems like the best choice. ;) But the problem with the question comes from the source of the error. If the question doesn't want to admit poor design or user error (of any kind), it's not clear what the opposite of foolproof could possibly be—because something has to produce an error of some kind . . .

    – Jason Bassford
    2 hours ago

















Isn't it more a case that the UI leads the user to be more fallible? Error prone may be better.

– James Random
3 hours ago





Isn't it more a case that the UI leads the user to be more fallible? Error prone may be better.

– James Random
3 hours ago




1




1





@JamesRandom I did say that error prone seems like the best choice. ;) But the problem with the question comes from the source of the error. If the question doesn't want to admit poor design or user error (of any kind), it's not clear what the opposite of foolproof could possibly be—because something has to produce an error of some kind . . .

– Jason Bassford
2 hours ago






@JamesRandom I did say that error prone seems like the best choice. ;) But the problem with the question comes from the source of the error. If the question doesn't want to admit poor design or user error (of any kind), it's not clear what the opposite of foolproof could possibly be—because something has to produce an error of some kind . . .

– Jason Bassford
2 hours ago












0















Misleading




Giving the wrong idea or impression - OOD



A confirmation pop-up is expected to ask if the user wants to continue. When it asks the negation of what is expected many people can be expected to answer incorrectly.






share|improve this answer























  • ISN’T IT CONFUSING? YES, IT ISN’T.

    – MikeJRamsey56
    4 hours ago















0















Misleading




Giving the wrong idea or impression - OOD



A confirmation pop-up is expected to ask if the user wants to continue. When it asks the negation of what is expected many people can be expected to answer incorrectly.






share|improve this answer























  • ISN’T IT CONFUSING? YES, IT ISN’T.

    – MikeJRamsey56
    4 hours ago













0












0








0








Misleading




Giving the wrong idea or impression - OOD



A confirmation pop-up is expected to ask if the user wants to continue. When it asks the negation of what is expected many people can be expected to answer incorrectly.






share|improve this answer














Misleading




Giving the wrong idea or impression - OOD



A confirmation pop-up is expected to ask if the user wants to continue. When it asks the negation of what is expected many people can be expected to answer incorrectly.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered 4 hours ago









MikeJRamsey56MikeJRamsey56

2,249315




2,249315












  • ISN’T IT CONFUSING? YES, IT ISN’T.

    – MikeJRamsey56
    4 hours ago

















  • ISN’T IT CONFUSING? YES, IT ISN’T.

    – MikeJRamsey56
    4 hours ago
















ISN’T IT CONFUSING? YES, IT ISN’T.

– MikeJRamsey56
4 hours ago





ISN’T IT CONFUSING? YES, IT ISN’T.

– MikeJRamsey56
4 hours ago

















draft saved

draft discarded
















































Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid


  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f496322%2fphrase-for-the-opposite-of-foolproof%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Disable / Remove link to Product Items in Cart Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern) Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?How can I limit products that can be bought / added to cart?Remove item from cartHide “Add to Cart” button if specific products are already in cart“Prettifying” the custom options in cart pageCreate link in cart sidebar to view all added items After limit reachedLink products together in checkout/cartHow to Get product from cart and add it againHide action-edit on cart page if simple productRemoving Cart items - ObserverRemove wishlist items when added to cart

Helsingin valtaus Sisällysluettelo Taustaa | Yleistä sotatoimista | Osapuolet | Taistelut Helsingin ympäristössä | Punaisten antautumissuunnitelma | Taistelujen kulku Helsingissä | Valtauksen jälkeen | Tappiot | Muistaminen | Kirjallisuutta | Lähteet | Aiheesta muualla | NavigointivalikkoTeoksen verkkoversioTeoksen verkkoversioGoogle BooksSisällissota Helsingissä päättyi tasan 95 vuotta sittenSaksalaisten ylivoima jyräsi punaisen HelsinginSuomalaiset kuvaavat sotien jälkiä kaupungeissa – katso kuvat ja tarinat tutuilta kulmiltaHelsingin valtaus 90 vuotta sittenSaksalaiset valtasivat HelsinginHyökkäys HelsinkiinHelsingin valtaus 12.–13.4. 1918Saksalaiset käyttivät ihmiskilpiä Helsingin valtauksessa 1918Teoksen verkkoversioTeoksen verkkoversioSaksalaiset hyökkäävät Etelä-SuomeenTaistelut LeppävaarassaSotilaat ja taistelutLeppävaara 1918 huhtikuussa. KapinatarinaHelsingin taistelut 1918Saksalaisten voitonparaati HelsingissäHelsingin valtausta juhlittiinSaksalaisten Helsinki vuonna 1918Helsingin taistelussa kaatuneet valkokaartilaisetHelsinkiin haudatut taisteluissa kaatuneet punaiset12.4.1918 Helsingin valtauksessa saksalaiset apujoukot vapauttavat kaupunginVapaussodan muistomerkkejä Helsingissä ja pääkaupunkiseudullaCrescendo / Vuoden 1918 Kansalaissodan uhrien muistomerkkim

Adjektiivitarina Tarinan tekeminen | Esimerkki: ennen | Esimerkki: jälkeen | Navigointivalikko