[Linux-aus] Some Anti-Harassment Policies considered harmful
elliottbrennan at gmail.com
Mon Feb 21 11:14:50 EST 2011
I think we're talking at cross-purposes here.
Legally-specific language is perfectly fine when
writing an Act of law or framing an application,
appeal etc to a court (even then clarity if
preferred to obfuscation and academic nitpicking
which can often be seen as legalese by many).
One of the things about the law (and IANAL) that I
do like is that you can trace back meanings and be
quite specific about what you intend your written
words to mean. You can usually (though not always)
ensure that what you write is what you mean and
that it is understood by others who have studied
in the same area. It can be quite good fun at times.
However, Plain English is required for policies
and is seen as a requirement in governments around
Australia (and in other countries such as the UK).
Clear English is also becoming a requirement
within the law and unnecessary pontification (some
is required just for the humour I reckon) is
frequently frowned upon - unless it comes from the
magistrate - and then you have to wait until the
Home computer software training and hardware
Stylishly edited DVDs of your photos and videos
On 21/02/11 10:45, David Lloyd wrote:
> <big snip>
> The reason we *have* legalese is precisely because
> *plain English* laws and policies are so easily
> misinterpreted...it is kind of circular!
More information about the linux-aus