4 ms·
I would say the original statements and your version of the statements are the same thing. If they were not they should read as: Embrace some viewpoints.
by talmand 11y ago
I would say the original statements and your version of the statements are the same thing. If they were not they should read as:
Embrace some viewpoints.
Allow some freedom of expression.
With whatever variation on the language as necessary. If the statement doesn't originally place a restriction on the idea, then it isn't necessary to specifically state there is no restriction.
Therefore, I would say that technically:
Embrace viewpoints.
Embrace all viewpoints.
Are, in fact, the same thing.
As for maintaining decorum, that where the restrictions come into play and have to be specifically stated:
Embrace diversity of viewpoints by permitting all
statements that follow community guidelines on language
pertaining to harassment, crudeness, personal attacks,
etc. Any statements may be censored for not following
community guidelines.
- maxerickson 11y agoIt's a fuzzy statement of values from a corporation. Reading it as if it is a computer program is a mistake. I guess you can choose to give them more or less credit based on how closely they hew to a pedantic squeezing of the meaning, but my point was that they do not emphasize that they are absolutes (even where simple language is available to do so).
- talmand 11y agoWhile true, that doesn't give you license to decide the definition of their statements.