This is a case where I’d actually use parentheses.
No, Okta, it was senior management (not an errant employee) that got you hacked.
Comment on No, Okta, senior management, not an errant employee, caused you to get hacked
otter@lemmy.ca 7 months ago
Title seems correct but confusing
No Okta, it was senior management, not an errant employee, that caused you to get hacked.
Coach@lemmy.world 7 months ago
No, Okta; senior management caused you to get hacked, not an errant employee.
Earthwormjim91@lemmy.world 7 months ago
You still need the comma before Okta to be grammatically correct.
More correct would be to just use multiple sentences.
“No, Okta. It was senior management, not an errant employee, that caused you to get hacked.
otter@lemmy.ca 7 months ago
That makes sense! I sometimes leave out commas that are probably necessary but feel excessive. I should just work on rephrasing things in a way such that commas aren’t necessary to begin with
little_hermit@lemmus.org 7 months ago
Commas, although sometimes omitted, should be used, and used often, as a means to clarify, and especially improve, long-winded statements, such as this one.
Instigate@aussie.zone 7 months ago
You could use a semicolon rather than a fullstop as well:
“No, Okta; it was senior management, not an errant employee, that caused you to get hacked.”
That may help elucidate the meaning better while maintaining a single sentence, as is par for the course with headlines.