Barry Leiba <barryleiba@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> That does seem better, but don't all parties have an obligation to >attempt >>> to communicate clearly? >> >> The new text is as follows: >> >> Participants, particularly those with English as a first language, >attempt >> to accommodate the needs of other participants by communicating >clearly. >> >> Participants try to accommodate each other. > >I agree with Scott that the stuff between the commas doesn't belong >here. > >That is, it doesn't belong *here*; it can certainly go into a sentence >or paragraph with advice for native English speakers. Consider >something like this instead: > > Participants must do their best to accommodate the needs of other > participants by communicating clearly. When faced with English that >is difficult to understand, we must all make the effort to understand >it > nonetheless, engaging in conversation to clarify what was meant. > Native English speakers, in particular, should be careful with the use >of slang and cultural references that might not be well known to >everyone. > >That might not be exactly right; please try to understand me, and >tweak as necessary. > I do think that's better. In my experience, once code of conduct type language is codified, eventually someone will try to use it as a hammer. It needs to be crafted with this assumption in mind. Thanks, Scott K