You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Aug 27, 2019. It is now read-only.
Big fan of the effort to soften up the language and put a friendlier face on the relationship. Just wondering whether the prior language ("dismissed", etc) was due to rules around how the process is supposed to be described. Maybe it's already been looked into, but just to be safe, I'd recommend double-checking with the subject-matter experts.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Big fan of the effort to soften up the language and put a friendlier face
on the relationship. Just wondering whether the prior language
("dismissed", etc) was due to rules around how the process is supposed to
be described. Maybe it's already been looked into, but just to be safe, I'd
recommend double-checking with the subject-matter experts.
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/185
.
It's probably good to start thinking about places in the UI that are "open" to CO feedback, and places where you're going to hold a line of defense. Essentially, you have to safeguard your product a bit from them, because they think like lawyers without having gone to law school. So this is what happens when you allow committees of COs to dictate the language of your entire product:
You also probably won't be able to get to that link. But you get the gist (that was a pun!).
If I were you, I'd take what COs say for the reviewing interface and backend stuff very seriously. For the rest of your product, I would use the language of small business, and take their feedback with a grain of salt for as long as possible. You do not what your registration process to look like Sam.gov's.
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Big fan of the effort to soften up the language and put a friendlier face on the relationship. Just wondering whether the prior language ("dismissed", etc) was due to rules around how the process is supposed to be described. Maybe it's already been looked into, but just to be safe, I'd recommend double-checking with the subject-matter experts.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: