> most likely they screwed up the phrasing but meant something extremely more limited I'm a pretty firm believer in Hanlon's razor ("never attribute to malice

> most likely they screwed up the phrasing but meant something extremely more limited I'm a pretty firm believer in Hanlon's razor ("never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity"), except when it comes to lawyers. They tend to put a lot of thought into what they write, and understand the ramifications of their words.