You're touching on the idea of a "truth baseline" as I call it. How do you know what's real vs bullshit?
My truth baseline is that maintaining the habitability of Earth is good. From that, I can deduce the following:
excessive carbon dioxide in atmosphere is bad
reliance on fossil fuels is bad
clean renewable energy is good
people who rail against renewables are bad
political part(ies) that do the same are bad
news figures that normalize that are bad
Etc. See where this is headed?
The ambiguity of whether someone is good or not is due to goodness being a subjective quality. There is no such thing as objective good. The closest thing to objective good we can attain is sustainability.
The same can be said about truth. If you want something objective, that's called fact. Truth is a subjective perception of facts. Thus... there is no one correct truth. Just an openness to adjust to new information while dismissing those who are opposed to your truth baseline.
I had a coworker named Mahmoud, and all my native-English-speaking coworkers heavily anglicized the pronunciation, removing the throat-clearing sound of the h, and changing the first vowel to like the a in "math" rather than like the a in "mall". Whenever I spoke to him, I tried to copy his inflection as best I could, and and he seemed delighted, but I never clarified if it was about my pronunciation.
Not at all. That customer was hunting for something to complain about so they could negotiate freebies from your boss. Sounds like your boss fell for it.
Italics can also denote emphasis.