Any reason you picked “too rich” instead of something like “over funded” or “has more funding reserves than we’d recommend”?
(“too rich” gives *me* connotations like “they’re spending money on unimportant luxury” or “rich people are [automatically] bad”. Not that you said that, I’m just sharing my associations of “too rich” which make me lean towards changing it)
Good question Yonatan. The “too rich” category has been around for a long time, but I think this is the first time it’s been given much attention. As a result, we haven’t thought hard about how it’s worded. “Overfunded” may well convey what we want without having unwanted connotations. Thank you for the comment.
Any reason you picked “too rich” instead of something like “over funded” or “has more funding reserves than we’d recommend”?
(“too rich” gives *me* connotations like “they’re spending money on unimportant luxury” or “rich people are [automatically] bad”. Not that you said that, I’m just sharing my associations of “too rich” which make me lean towards changing it)
Good question Yonatan. The “too rich” category has been around for a long time, but I think this is the first time it’s been given much attention. As a result, we haven’t thought hard about how it’s worded. “Overfunded” may well convey what we want without having unwanted connotations. Thank you for the comment.
Or how about, rather than, “too rich” it’s has “no room for more funding” (noRFMF)?