Count me among those who dislike using impact as a verb. I didn't say it couldn't be justified or defended on linguistic and historical grounds, as pointed out by The American Heritage Dictionary and others.
But I don't have to like such usage -- or use it.
And if I do use impact as a verb, I want it reserved for one of its most literal meanings, which I experienced yesterday as a passenger in a car.
"The car I was riding in was impacted by a pickup truck advancing upon us from the rear, which forced our car to collide with the car in front of us."
Yes, collided is a better verb. (But the collision, or, um, adverse impacted event, also known as an accident, hurts just as much or causes as much damage.)
Along with others, I don't like impact as a verb because it smacks of smug jargon. A more specific verb (affected, influenced, harmed, deteriorated, corrupted, failed...) would convey the real intended meaning. But maybe the users of impact as a verb are trying to obfuscate. (I think the current vogue use is owing to the jargon employed in environmental impact statements.)
No one got hurt in the accident. I thought I'd be sore today, but wasn't.
There but for the grace of God go I.
(Hmmm, as noted in the link above, Wikipedia gives an informative history of that phrase, crediting John Bradford.)
It wasn't a semitractor-trailer bearing down on us.
I am reminded of Emily Dickinson's sobering words:
Because I could not stop for Death He kindly stopped for me. . . .