Is there a nicer/politer/more positive alternative for “negates”?Positive alternative to “ominous”A positive alternative to 'harp'What's the word for “too many but not good enough”?More fitting alternative for 'air-raid'What is the meaning of: “If we offend, it is with our good will”Is there a more positive alternative to the word “inevitability”?“within the context” of a workshop - synonymsNicer word for inquisitorA more positive word for “co-conspirator”?Isn't there a simple adverb for the opposite of 'loudly'?

Is this toilet slogan correct usage of the English language?

Why does Carol not get rid of the Kree symbol on her suit when she changes its colours?

Unable to get dependencies from jcenter with a new project

What is Cash Advance APR?

A variation to the phrase "hanging over my shoulders"

How to make money from a browser who sees 5 seconds into the future of any web page?

Is there any evidence that Cleopatra and Caesarion considered fleeing to India to escape the Romans?

Permission on Database

Merge org tables

Which was the first story featuring espers?

In a multiple cat home, how many litter boxes should you have?

Why is so much work done on numerical verification of the Riemann Hypothesis?

What does Apple's new App Store requirement mean

Are Captain Marvel's powers affected by Thanos breaking the Tesseract and claiming the stone?

Change the color of a single dot in `ddot` symbol

Creating two special characters

How much theory knowledge is actually used while playing?

Which Article Helped Get Rid of Technobabble in RPGs?

Quoting Keynes in a lecture

The IT department bottlenecks progress, how should I handle this?

Pre-mixing cryogenic fuels and using only one fuel tank

What does "Scientists rise up against statistical significance" mean? (Comment in Nature)

What is the difference between lands and mana?

How much of a Devil Fruit must be consumed to gain the power?



Is there a nicer/politer/more positive alternative for “negates”?


Positive alternative to “ominous”A positive alternative to 'harp'What's the word for “too many but not good enough”?More fitting alternative for 'air-raid'What is the meaning of: “If we offend, it is with our good will”Is there a more positive alternative to the word “inevitability”?“within the context” of a workshop - synonymsNicer word for inquisitorA more positive word for “co-conspirator”?Isn't there a simple adverb for the opposite of 'loudly'?













2















I have somewhere the following sentence:




our platform negates the need for a middleman ...




but I do not want to offend or upset the middlemen whomever it is ... there are many middlemen in the context I'm reffering to there.



The question is how can I replace "negate" that is too abrupt, radical and may upset people with something more reasonable?



Would "diminishes" be a good alternative? other suggestions?










share|improve this question







New contributor




SkyWalker is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




















  • How about "offsets"?

    – Hot Licks
    4 hours ago






  • 3





    “Eliminates the middleman” is a common phrase, but i don’t see how that would make the middleman any happier.

    – Damila
    4 hours ago











  • If you're trying not to offend the middlemen that you're trying to eliminate, I suspect that it's not a matter of word choice (put away the thesaurus) but of phrasing. As Paul S. Lee notes below, you may need to avoid explicitly saying that you're getting rid of them, and instead put some positive spin on how you're saying it. That said, as @Damila said, "cutting out the middleman" is a very common expression, and you might get away with using it if your audience doesn't realize that you're using it completely literally.

    – A C
    50 mins ago















2















I have somewhere the following sentence:




our platform negates the need for a middleman ...




but I do not want to offend or upset the middlemen whomever it is ... there are many middlemen in the context I'm reffering to there.



The question is how can I replace "negate" that is too abrupt, radical and may upset people with something more reasonable?



Would "diminishes" be a good alternative? other suggestions?










share|improve this question







New contributor




SkyWalker is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




















  • How about "offsets"?

    – Hot Licks
    4 hours ago






  • 3





    “Eliminates the middleman” is a common phrase, but i don’t see how that would make the middleman any happier.

    – Damila
    4 hours ago











  • If you're trying not to offend the middlemen that you're trying to eliminate, I suspect that it's not a matter of word choice (put away the thesaurus) but of phrasing. As Paul S. Lee notes below, you may need to avoid explicitly saying that you're getting rid of them, and instead put some positive spin on how you're saying it. That said, as @Damila said, "cutting out the middleman" is a very common expression, and you might get away with using it if your audience doesn't realize that you're using it completely literally.

    – A C
    50 mins ago













2












2








2








I have somewhere the following sentence:




our platform negates the need for a middleman ...




but I do not want to offend or upset the middlemen whomever it is ... there are many middlemen in the context I'm reffering to there.



The question is how can I replace "negate" that is too abrupt, radical and may upset people with something more reasonable?



Would "diminishes" be a good alternative? other suggestions?










share|improve this question







New contributor




SkyWalker is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












I have somewhere the following sentence:




our platform negates the need for a middleman ...




but I do not want to offend or upset the middlemen whomever it is ... there are many middlemen in the context I'm reffering to there.



The question is how can I replace "negate" that is too abrupt, radical and may upset people with something more reasonable?



Would "diminishes" be a good alternative? other suggestions?







single-word-requests meaning synonyms






share|improve this question







New contributor




SkyWalker is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question







New contributor




SkyWalker is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question






New contributor




SkyWalker is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 4 hours ago









SkyWalkerSkyWalker

1112




1112




New contributor




SkyWalker is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





SkyWalker is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






SkyWalker is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












  • How about "offsets"?

    – Hot Licks
    4 hours ago






  • 3





    “Eliminates the middleman” is a common phrase, but i don’t see how that would make the middleman any happier.

    – Damila
    4 hours ago











  • If you're trying not to offend the middlemen that you're trying to eliminate, I suspect that it's not a matter of word choice (put away the thesaurus) but of phrasing. As Paul S. Lee notes below, you may need to avoid explicitly saying that you're getting rid of them, and instead put some positive spin on how you're saying it. That said, as @Damila said, "cutting out the middleman" is a very common expression, and you might get away with using it if your audience doesn't realize that you're using it completely literally.

    – A C
    50 mins ago

















  • How about "offsets"?

    – Hot Licks
    4 hours ago






  • 3





    “Eliminates the middleman” is a common phrase, but i don’t see how that would make the middleman any happier.

    – Damila
    4 hours ago











  • If you're trying not to offend the middlemen that you're trying to eliminate, I suspect that it's not a matter of word choice (put away the thesaurus) but of phrasing. As Paul S. Lee notes below, you may need to avoid explicitly saying that you're getting rid of them, and instead put some positive spin on how you're saying it. That said, as @Damila said, "cutting out the middleman" is a very common expression, and you might get away with using it if your audience doesn't realize that you're using it completely literally.

    – A C
    50 mins ago
















How about "offsets"?

– Hot Licks
4 hours ago





How about "offsets"?

– Hot Licks
4 hours ago




3




3





“Eliminates the middleman” is a common phrase, but i don’t see how that would make the middleman any happier.

– Damila
4 hours ago





“Eliminates the middleman” is a common phrase, but i don’t see how that would make the middleman any happier.

– Damila
4 hours ago













If you're trying not to offend the middlemen that you're trying to eliminate, I suspect that it's not a matter of word choice (put away the thesaurus) but of phrasing. As Paul S. Lee notes below, you may need to avoid explicitly saying that you're getting rid of them, and instead put some positive spin on how you're saying it. That said, as @Damila said, "cutting out the middleman" is a very common expression, and you might get away with using it if your audience doesn't realize that you're using it completely literally.

– A C
50 mins ago





If you're trying not to offend the middlemen that you're trying to eliminate, I suspect that it's not a matter of word choice (put away the thesaurus) but of phrasing. As Paul S. Lee notes below, you may need to avoid explicitly saying that you're getting rid of them, and instead put some positive spin on how you're saying it. That said, as @Damila said, "cutting out the middleman" is a very common expression, and you might get away with using it if your audience doesn't realize that you're using it completely literally.

– A C
50 mins ago










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















4














A (somewhat formal/technical) term used in such situations is obviate.




our platform obviates the need for a middleman ...




ODO:




obviate
VERB [WITH OBJECT]
1 Remove (a need or difficulty)



‘the presence of roller blinds obviated the need for curtains’







share|improve this answer























  • 'Obviates' is another way of saying 'by-passes,' using Latin roots.

    – Hugh
    1 hour ago


















1














I'd say:
Our platform allows you to forgo the middleman.
(Positive language, as opposed to negative.)






share|improve this answer








New contributor




ElG is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




















  • Or even: Our platform allows you to go straight to the <source, end customer, whatever> or gives you direct access to, allows direct interaction with... don’t mention middlemen at all.

    – Jim
    1 hour ago











  • I like this answer since "allows you" shifts the attention to the purchaser of the platform / end user.

    – Paul S. Lee
    1 hour ago


















1














I'm in IT development, where our raison d'etre is to automate business processes which often put some people out of job. The standard approach we use to sell IT projects when we cannot outright eliminate the jobs is to empower them to do more value-added service to the business because with automation they have more time to do so.



I don't know your situation. If the middleman can be re-purposed you can say "our platform frees the middleman from administrative duties to empower them for ..."



EDIT: I didn't notice that Elliot already suggested the same thing.






share|improve this answer








New contributor




Paul S. Lee is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.



























    0














    For one, I'd say if the need is only diminished then the platform has does not do the whole job. You are only ending the Need for the middleman. You are not taking them away and chopping them up. There are surely better things for them to go and do.



    For alternatives you could use "Removes" or "Eliminates" the need. If you hope to be very gentle you could "relieve" the need for the middleman but that would be an odd choice.



    Or get around it by "replacing" the middleman or 'Doing the job of the middleman'. In any case you are selling a function or product. It's impact on individuals is not part of the design or construction of the item.






    share|improve this answer






















      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
      );



      );






      SkyWalker is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function ()
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f490767%2fis-there-a-nicer-politer-more-positive-alternative-for-negates%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









      4














      A (somewhat formal/technical) term used in such situations is obviate.




      our platform obviates the need for a middleman ...




      ODO:




      obviate
      VERB [WITH OBJECT]
      1 Remove (a need or difficulty)



      ‘the presence of roller blinds obviated the need for curtains’







      share|improve this answer























      • 'Obviates' is another way of saying 'by-passes,' using Latin roots.

        – Hugh
        1 hour ago















      4














      A (somewhat formal/technical) term used in such situations is obviate.




      our platform obviates the need for a middleman ...




      ODO:




      obviate
      VERB [WITH OBJECT]
      1 Remove (a need or difficulty)



      ‘the presence of roller blinds obviated the need for curtains’







      share|improve this answer























      • 'Obviates' is another way of saying 'by-passes,' using Latin roots.

        – Hugh
        1 hour ago













      4












      4








      4







      A (somewhat formal/technical) term used in such situations is obviate.




      our platform obviates the need for a middleman ...




      ODO:




      obviate
      VERB [WITH OBJECT]
      1 Remove (a need or difficulty)



      ‘the presence of roller blinds obviated the need for curtains’







      share|improve this answer













      A (somewhat formal/technical) term used in such situations is obviate.




      our platform obviates the need for a middleman ...




      ODO:




      obviate
      VERB [WITH OBJECT]
      1 Remove (a need or difficulty)



      ‘the presence of roller blinds obviated the need for curtains’








      share|improve this answer












      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer










      answered 4 hours ago









      alwayslearningalwayslearning

      26.4k63894




      26.4k63894












      • 'Obviates' is another way of saying 'by-passes,' using Latin roots.

        – Hugh
        1 hour ago

















      • 'Obviates' is another way of saying 'by-passes,' using Latin roots.

        – Hugh
        1 hour ago
















      'Obviates' is another way of saying 'by-passes,' using Latin roots.

      – Hugh
      1 hour ago





      'Obviates' is another way of saying 'by-passes,' using Latin roots.

      – Hugh
      1 hour ago













      1














      I'd say:
      Our platform allows you to forgo the middleman.
      (Positive language, as opposed to negative.)






      share|improve this answer








      New contributor




      ElG is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.




















      • Or even: Our platform allows you to go straight to the <source, end customer, whatever> or gives you direct access to, allows direct interaction with... don’t mention middlemen at all.

        – Jim
        1 hour ago











      • I like this answer since "allows you" shifts the attention to the purchaser of the platform / end user.

        – Paul S. Lee
        1 hour ago















      1














      I'd say:
      Our platform allows you to forgo the middleman.
      (Positive language, as opposed to negative.)






      share|improve this answer








      New contributor




      ElG is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.




















      • Or even: Our platform allows you to go straight to the <source, end customer, whatever> or gives you direct access to, allows direct interaction with... don’t mention middlemen at all.

        – Jim
        1 hour ago











      • I like this answer since "allows you" shifts the attention to the purchaser of the platform / end user.

        – Paul S. Lee
        1 hour ago













      1












      1








      1







      I'd say:
      Our platform allows you to forgo the middleman.
      (Positive language, as opposed to negative.)






      share|improve this answer








      New contributor




      ElG is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.










      I'd say:
      Our platform allows you to forgo the middleman.
      (Positive language, as opposed to negative.)







      share|improve this answer








      New contributor




      ElG is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer






      New contributor




      ElG is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      answered 4 hours ago









      ElGElG

      111




      111




      New contributor




      ElG is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.





      New contributor





      ElG is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      ElG is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.












      • Or even: Our platform allows you to go straight to the <source, end customer, whatever> or gives you direct access to, allows direct interaction with... don’t mention middlemen at all.

        – Jim
        1 hour ago











      • I like this answer since "allows you" shifts the attention to the purchaser of the platform / end user.

        – Paul S. Lee
        1 hour ago

















      • Or even: Our platform allows you to go straight to the <source, end customer, whatever> or gives you direct access to, allows direct interaction with... don’t mention middlemen at all.

        – Jim
        1 hour ago











      • I like this answer since "allows you" shifts the attention to the purchaser of the platform / end user.

        – Paul S. Lee
        1 hour ago
















      Or even: Our platform allows you to go straight to the <source, end customer, whatever> or gives you direct access to, allows direct interaction with... don’t mention middlemen at all.

      – Jim
      1 hour ago





      Or even: Our platform allows you to go straight to the <source, end customer, whatever> or gives you direct access to, allows direct interaction with... don’t mention middlemen at all.

      – Jim
      1 hour ago













      I like this answer since "allows you" shifts the attention to the purchaser of the platform / end user.

      – Paul S. Lee
      1 hour ago





      I like this answer since "allows you" shifts the attention to the purchaser of the platform / end user.

      – Paul S. Lee
      1 hour ago











      1














      I'm in IT development, where our raison d'etre is to automate business processes which often put some people out of job. The standard approach we use to sell IT projects when we cannot outright eliminate the jobs is to empower them to do more value-added service to the business because with automation they have more time to do so.



      I don't know your situation. If the middleman can be re-purposed you can say "our platform frees the middleman from administrative duties to empower them for ..."



      EDIT: I didn't notice that Elliot already suggested the same thing.






      share|improve this answer








      New contributor




      Paul S. Lee is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.
























        1














        I'm in IT development, where our raison d'etre is to automate business processes which often put some people out of job. The standard approach we use to sell IT projects when we cannot outright eliminate the jobs is to empower them to do more value-added service to the business because with automation they have more time to do so.



        I don't know your situation. If the middleman can be re-purposed you can say "our platform frees the middleman from administrative duties to empower them for ..."



        EDIT: I didn't notice that Elliot already suggested the same thing.






        share|improve this answer








        New contributor




        Paul S. Lee is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.






















          1












          1








          1







          I'm in IT development, where our raison d'etre is to automate business processes which often put some people out of job. The standard approach we use to sell IT projects when we cannot outright eliminate the jobs is to empower them to do more value-added service to the business because with automation they have more time to do so.



          I don't know your situation. If the middleman can be re-purposed you can say "our platform frees the middleman from administrative duties to empower them for ..."



          EDIT: I didn't notice that Elliot already suggested the same thing.






          share|improve this answer








          New contributor




          Paul S. Lee is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.










          I'm in IT development, where our raison d'etre is to automate business processes which often put some people out of job. The standard approach we use to sell IT projects when we cannot outright eliminate the jobs is to empower them to do more value-added service to the business because with automation they have more time to do so.



          I don't know your situation. If the middleman can be re-purposed you can say "our platform frees the middleman from administrative duties to empower them for ..."



          EDIT: I didn't notice that Elliot already suggested the same thing.







          share|improve this answer








          New contributor




          Paul S. Lee is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.









          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer






          New contributor




          Paul S. Lee is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.









          answered 2 hours ago









          Paul S. LeePaul S. Lee

          1244




          1244




          New contributor




          Paul S. Lee is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.





          New contributor





          Paul S. Lee is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.






          Paul S. Lee is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.





















              0














              For one, I'd say if the need is only diminished then the platform has does not do the whole job. You are only ending the Need for the middleman. You are not taking them away and chopping them up. There are surely better things for them to go and do.



              For alternatives you could use "Removes" or "Eliminates" the need. If you hope to be very gentle you could "relieve" the need for the middleman but that would be an odd choice.



              Or get around it by "replacing" the middleman or 'Doing the job of the middleman'. In any case you are selling a function or product. It's impact on individuals is not part of the design or construction of the item.






              share|improve this answer



























                0














                For one, I'd say if the need is only diminished then the platform has does not do the whole job. You are only ending the Need for the middleman. You are not taking them away and chopping them up. There are surely better things for them to go and do.



                For alternatives you could use "Removes" or "Eliminates" the need. If you hope to be very gentle you could "relieve" the need for the middleman but that would be an odd choice.



                Or get around it by "replacing" the middleman or 'Doing the job of the middleman'. In any case you are selling a function or product. It's impact on individuals is not part of the design or construction of the item.






                share|improve this answer

























                  0












                  0








                  0







                  For one, I'd say if the need is only diminished then the platform has does not do the whole job. You are only ending the Need for the middleman. You are not taking them away and chopping them up. There are surely better things for them to go and do.



                  For alternatives you could use "Removes" or "Eliminates" the need. If you hope to be very gentle you could "relieve" the need for the middleman but that would be an odd choice.



                  Or get around it by "replacing" the middleman or 'Doing the job of the middleman'. In any case you are selling a function or product. It's impact on individuals is not part of the design or construction of the item.






                  share|improve this answer













                  For one, I'd say if the need is only diminished then the platform has does not do the whole job. You are only ending the Need for the middleman. You are not taking them away and chopping them up. There are surely better things for them to go and do.



                  For alternatives you could use "Removes" or "Eliminates" the need. If you hope to be very gentle you could "relieve" the need for the middleman but that would be an odd choice.



                  Or get around it by "replacing" the middleman or 'Doing the job of the middleman'. In any case you are selling a function or product. It's impact on individuals is not part of the design or construction of the item.







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered 4 hours ago









                  ElliotElliot

                  742




                  742




















                      SkyWalker is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









                      draft saved

                      draft discarded


















                      SkyWalker is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












                      SkyWalker is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











                      SkyWalker is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














                      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%2f490767%2fis-there-a-nicer-politer-more-positive-alternative-for-negates%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