SJ Longthorne

Using that example, is there a way that it could be neutral? Any less than positive is surely negative, no? Or maybe that’s just my flawed psyche at play.

I see it this way. Awesome in general is a positive statement, yes. But you could also be brilliant or very awesome. That's definitely more positive than just awesome. So with that in mind 'generally awesome' could go both ways. But maybe I'm being too analytical about this.

so would your argument be that ‘generally brilliant’ is neutral because the tier below brilliant is still good?

Yeah, I guess that's what it boils down to. Generally is dependant on the adjective following it imho.

In that case isn’t it better to drop the ‘generally’ and instead just use that lower tier word outright? ‘You’re good’ would sit better with me than ‘You’re generally amazing’.

Agreed. I think that might have something to do with most people wanting to present things in a more positive way than they are (even if they're already positive). I can't come up with a very good example right now. But most people would rather have 100p than 1 Pound.

I mean, yes people can still use generally as a roundabout way to throw shade. But they can do that with any word as long as they redefine the definition of said word (you just wouldn't know about it). Cont.

So if you can't assume someone is using it in a neutral way, assume they used it with the best of intentions. The alternative would be to always assume the worst and that's no way to have a decent conversation with people.