Acvtually, the politically correctness of "please be advised..." is even more insidious, which, in a way, makes your compiance irrelevant, or, at least, automatic.

I suppose you could call it a fait accompli, but rather, it is ultimately, cowardice. "Wait for the train to..." is a directive, a positive warning to wait until the train stops. Of course, "Please wait..." is a bit more more polite.

"be advised that you must wait..." or "please be advised..." is also a directive, but only a directive to, well, um, be advised; make note.

Essentially, this is just some hogwash that means something like "Oh, noooo, we're not saying that you should wait for the train to stop. We certainly wouldn't want you to think that we are taking AAAANNYYY responsibility for safety or AAAANNNYTHING that might happen to you on OUR train. NOOOOO, we're just saying that you should 'be advised'. We're just saying that we're TELLING you that we're, um, TELLING YOU something. That's all. Simply by listening to this message, you have complied with it. That way, you can't claim that we didn't warn you. If you get hurt, then that's YOUR problem. WE'RE only responsible for TELLING you. Since you LISTENED, we SUCCEEDED in telling you, so we met OUR legal obligation since, after all, you WERE ADVISED!!!."

Consider this: UPS and FedEx will not deliver to PO boxes. Sometimes when someone wants your "mailing" address, they really want your actual street address in order to send a package to be delivered to your home via a delivery service other than the post office.

Robert., no matter now mad you may be, you are mistaken. I checked two dictionaries. One had thirty five definitions of "issue" and the other had over fifty. The word can mean much more than just "topic..." Here are some of the more relevant ones:

A point or matter of discussion, debate, or dispute.

A misgiving, objection, or complaint.

So, when someone refers to a problem they're having as an "issue" they are quite correct. I do, however, get annoyed by Microsoft who has a official corporate policy that their software NEVER has any BUGS, only ISSUES. Such a use may be more the type of euphemism you are complaining about.

Acually, swans are NOT the only birds that have penises. Many bird species do not have penises, but quite a few do have them. Ducks do. So do geese, chickens, turkeys, ostriches, tinamous (kiwis, emus, rheas, etc.) cassowaries, curassows, etc.

First, evident is an adjective. Evidenced is a verb (well, a participle). Evident means clear, plain, understandable. Evidenced (or in the simple present tense, evidence as a verb) means to make something evident. So if A is evident because of B, then B evidences A.

That being said, you could probably go either way. Compare:

God created man.
Man was created by God.

or:

I ate the pizza.
The pizza was eaten by me.

All are correct, although in both cases, the second choice is in a more passive voice, something some say should be avoided.

I would suggest any of the following is correct:

"The liquidity is high, as [is] evident from the Reserve Bank of India's reverse repo auctions." (note the added "is")

"The liquidity is high, as evidenced [by] the Reserve Bank of India's reverse repo auctions." (note, "by" replaces "from")

"The Reserve Bank of India's reverse repo auctions evidences the high liquidity we are experiencing." (stronger than choice two by avoiding the passive voice)

While there is some overlap, "any" and "some" don't mean exactly the same thing. They're both indeterminate amounts but any means any at all, even the smallest iota, while some is a more general non-specific amount. If it's something countable, then if you have exactly one, you don't have some, but you do have "any".

Usually, when some is used in a question, any is used in the negative answer: "Want some pizza?" "No thanks, I don't want any pizza." This illustrates exactly the point above.

Consider: "Have I been of any help?" (...at all? even the smallest amount? anything greater than none?) "Yes, you've been of some help" (some unspecified amount, NOT implied to be the least possible).

Practically speaking, both phrases in the original question express a similar sentiment, but do not have exactly the same meaning.

Oh, silly us, AO. The possessive really should be "the Valdezes' ", shouldn't it? "The Valdez' " or "the Valdez's" only makes sense if there's only one of them. In that case, there would be no "the" unless he or she is THE Valdez, the one and only, the greatest Valdez ever!

AO, there is no real consensus on whether the possessive should be Valdez' or Valdez's. I would suggest that either is correct. There are many respected sources that say one, the other, or both.

While "the class" is certainly singular, consider the intent. A situation is implied where the teacher is trying in vain to get the students in the class to do something. If you use "it" instead of "they", then you ignore the fact that each student is free to listen to the teacher or not. You require the class to act in unison in their disobedience, which does not make any sense at all. You also ignore the possibility that every student could be ignoring the teacher's advice, but still not necessarily doing the same thing. "Do what you want" addressed to a group usually means that each individual can do something different (unless, they're all voting on a single group activity).

If one wanted to be pedantic, I guess one could make a case that the sentence is weak and should be recast. You could eliminate the mismatched case and potential amgibuity by , say, changing "told the class..." to "told the students in the class..."

Please forgive the bad punctuation/capitalization, above. I have a bad cold.