README wording suggestion #27
Labels
Comments
|
I still think it is ambiguous, actually. To be fully unambiguous, perhaps: Please don't give other users legal advice. Legal advice tends to confuse users. OR Please don't give advice because it tends to confuse them. OR To avoid confusing users, please don't give legal advice. What do you think? In any case, mind making a small PR for your proposal for a speedier acceptance and application (if approved)? |
|
I don’t see the sit-policy branch. Where should I create the PR?
From: Bean [mailto:notifications@github.com]
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 06:24
To: github/site-policy <site-policy@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Mark Richter <mrichter@solarflare.com>; Author <author@noreply.github.com>
Subject: Re: [github/site-policy] README wording suggestion (#27)
I still think it is ambiguous, actually. To be fully unambiguous, perhaps:
Please don't give other users legal advice. Legal advice tends to confuse users.
OR
Please don't give advice because it tends to confuse them.
OR
To avoid confusing users, please don't give legal advice.
What do you think? In any case, mind making a small PR for your proposal for a speedier acceptance and application (if approved)?
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_github_site-2Dpolicy_issues_27-23issuecomment-2D315754255&d=DQMFaQ&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=524okDh5adlYIDB-3DGPNV66wpWvvI-6Uyp96Y4GLbA&m=wqnVMD0i-6E6lyKWb5gpcCMT_BnveCUr8mJhPhp9W0U&s=Ba6UtYrUHlYN5K8RsM0CIDyGxOYiHWJT7AJ4pgtxGSs&e=>, or mute the thread<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_notifications_unsubscribe-2Dauth_AbSDW1K8C54e-5FfdiPDzEFt03KZqS3OHrks5sO2B1gaJpZM4OTVj7&d=DQMFaQ&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=524okDh5adlYIDB-3DGPNV66wpWvvI-6Uyp96Y4GLbA&m=wqnVMD0i-6E6lyKWb5gpcCMT_BnveCUr8mJhPhp9W0U&s=2xzi2b3TWhh6s5z80G7UCP5mV6xHcNgXvNmWmRP_cCE&e=>.
The information contained in this message is confidential and is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the message. Unless you are an addressee (or authorized to receive for an addressee), you may not use, copy or disclose to anyone this message or any information contained in this message. The unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or alteration of this message is strictly prohibited.
|
|
Scratch that (I gotta read the pages more carefully…).
Which branch of site-policy should I use?
From: Mark Richter
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 10:23
To: 'github/site-policy' <reply@reply.github.com>; github/site-policy <site-policy@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Author <author@noreply.github.com>
Subject: RE: [github/site-policy] README wording suggestion (#27)
I don’t see the sit-policy branch. Where should I create the PR?
From: Bean [mailto:notifications@github.com]
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 06:24
To: github/site-policy <site-policy@noreply.github.com<mailto:site-policy@noreply.github.com>>
Cc: Mark Richter <mrichter@solarflare.com<mailto:mrichter@solarflare.com>>; Author <author@noreply.github.com<mailto:author@noreply.github.com>>
Subject: Re: [github/site-policy] README wording suggestion (#27)
I still think it is ambiguous, actually. To be fully unambiguous, perhaps:
Please don't give other users legal advice. Legal advice tends to confuse users.
OR
Please don't give advice because it tends to confuse them.
OR
To avoid confusing users, please don't give legal advice.
What do you think? In any case, mind making a small PR for your proposal for a speedier acceptance and application (if approved)?
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_github_site-2Dpolicy_issues_27-23issuecomment-2D315754255&d=DQMFaQ&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=524okDh5adlYIDB-3DGPNV66wpWvvI-6Uyp96Y4GLbA&m=wqnVMD0i-6E6lyKWb5gpcCMT_BnveCUr8mJhPhp9W0U&s=Ba6UtYrUHlYN5K8RsM0CIDyGxOYiHWJT7AJ4pgtxGSs&e=>, or mute the thread<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_notifications_unsubscribe-2Dauth_AbSDW1K8C54e-5FfdiPDzEFt03KZqS3OHrks5sO2B1gaJpZM4OTVj7&d=DQMFaQ&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=524okDh5adlYIDB-3DGPNV66wpWvvI-6Uyp96Y4GLbA&m=wqnVMD0i-6E6lyKWb5gpcCMT_BnveCUr8mJhPhp9W0U&s=2xzi2b3TWhh6s5z80G7UCP5mV6xHcNgXvNmWmRP_cCE&e=>.
The information contained in this message is confidential and is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the message. Unless you are an addressee (or authorized to receive for an addressee), you may not use, copy or disclose to anyone this message or any information contained in this message. The unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or alteration of this message is strictly prohibited.
|
|
I do but know either.
…On Mon, Jul 17, 2017, 10:24 AM Mark Richter ***@***.***> wrote:
Scratch that (I gotta read the pages more carefully…).
Which branch of site-policy should I use?
From: Mark Richter
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 10:23
To: 'github/site-policy' ***@***.***>; github/site-policy <
***@***.***>
Cc: Author ***@***.***>
Subject: RE: [github/site-policy] README wording suggestion (#27)
I don’t see the sit-policy branch. Where should I create the PR?
From: Bean ***@***.***
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 06:24
To: github/site-policy ***@***.***<mailto:
***@***.***>>
Cc: Mark Richter ***@***.******@***.***>>;
Author ***@***.******@***.***>>
Subject: Re: [github/site-policy] README wording suggestion (#27)
I still think it is ambiguous, actually. To be fully unambiguous, perhaps:
Please don't give other users legal advice. Legal advice tends to confuse
users.
OR
Please don't give advice because it tends to confuse them.
OR
To avoid confusing users, please don't give legal advice.
What do you think? In any case, mind making a small PR for your proposal
for a speedier acceptance and application (if approved)?
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_github_site-2Dpolicy_issues_27-23issuecomment-2D315754255&d=DQMFaQ&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=524okDh5adlYIDB-3DGPNV66wpWvvI-6Uyp96Y4GLbA&m=wqnVMD0i-6E6lyKWb5gpcCMT_BnveCUr8mJhPhp9W0U&s=Ba6UtYrUHlYN5K8RsM0CIDyGxOYiHWJT7AJ4pgtxGSs&e=>,
or mute the thread<
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_notifications_unsubscribe-2Dauth_AbSDW1K8C54e-5FfdiPDzEFt03KZqS3OHrks5sO2B1gaJpZM4OTVj7&d=DQMFaQ&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=524okDh5adlYIDB-3DGPNV66wpWvvI-6Uyp96Y4GLbA&m=wqnVMD0i-6E6lyKWb5gpcCMT_BnveCUr8mJhPhp9W0U&s=2xzi2b3TWhh6s5z80G7UCP5mV6xHcNgXvNmWmRP_cCE&e=>.
The information contained in this message is confidential and is intended
for the addressee(s) only. If you have received this message in error,
please notify the sender immediately and delete the message. Unless you are
an addressee (or authorized to receive for an addressee), you may not use,
copy or disclose to anyone this message or any information contained in
this message. The unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or alteration of
this message is strictly prohibited.
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#27 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AB9SJrhdFd0PSQc41t9f-Efn-Vsdm5VHks5sO5i0gaJpZM4OTVj7>
.
|
|
Thanks, @sf-mrichter and @bean5. We took another look at the language, but ultimately, we think we're pretty clear that users shouldn't be giving legal advice in this repository. There are many reasons why users should not be giving legal advice here, and we don't think most people will be confused by our wording. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
In the README, under the few things that should not be posted in the repo, it says this:
Please don't give other users legal advice, to avoid confusion.
I suggest rewording that to be:
To avoid confusion, please don't give other users legal advice.
It could easily be read to mean that giving others legal advice to avoid confusion is not a good idea. Technically, this is true, but it's not what you mean and the above wording is unambiguous.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: