Re: liability

Subject: Re: liability
From: David Jones/KSBEISD <David_Jones/KSBEISD -dot- KSBEISD -at- DATAHUB -dot- COM>
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 08:21:57 HST

I had a slightly humorous encounter with an attorney who was a user reviewer of
some documentation for our new purchasing system ... I sent the draft off, and
got a puzzled phone call back. The attorney couldn't tell why she needed to
review the doc, since it was intended solely for in-house use ... After I
explained what I needed her to do, she said, "Oh, I thought you needed a
*legal* review!" (You know, checking it for legal issues.)

Gotta watch them little words like "review." Doesn't the standing rule in
English say that the shorter the word, the slipperier the meaning?

David Jones, Technical Writer
David_Jones/KSBEISD -dot- KSBEISD -at- Datahub -dot- com
Kamehameha Schools Bishop Estate

DISCLAIMER:
"I do not speak for my employer, my computer, or any other living thing."

From: Matthew_B._Epstein @ mail.hq.faa.gov ("Matthew B. Epstein")
Date: 03/26/96 10:48:36 AM
Subject: liability

To try to prevent liability concerns from cropping up we submit all
our tech docs through an attorney for legal review. Does anyone else
on the list do that?


Previous by Author: Re: Re[2]: HTML vs. Adobe Acrobat
Next by Author: Re: limitation on warranties and liability
Previous by Thread: Re: Liability
Next by Thread: Re: Liability


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads