Re: [needs proofread & IT translation] Refund4Freedom news item

At the moment, I am unable to read the revised version of the relevant
paragraph at https://git.fsfe.org/FSFE/fsfe-website/pulls/5063 .

I fall back onto the original text as cited by Luca in his message
that I report below, and his suggestion.

==========

Since i have been asked to proofread, and the timing seems right, I
make the most minor of suggestions:  Add the word "A" at the
beginning, so that the revised paragraph starts "A few manufacturers
have defined" rather than "Few manufacturers have defined."  There is
no change in the meaning, and there is nothing wrong with his
phrasing, but my suggested version fits a little better with the later
text, "But for most others."

==========

Here is Luca's message.  The time stamp is in terms of my time zone,
not his.  It is now five hours after this message arrived in my inbox.

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Luca Bonissi <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, May 29, 2025 at 5:22 AM
Subject: [Translators] Re: [needs proofread & IT translation]
Refund4Freedom news item
To: <[email protected]>


Hello all!

Sorry for the big delay... maybe I'm arriving too late, but I'd like to
highlight a not-so-correct consideration on the second-last paragraph.

It says:

"Some manufacturers have defined better policies and clearer procedures
for requesting and obtaining refunds, as a similar successful case
against HP that Luca started in 2019 shows. But for others, consumers
are forced to engage in persistent correspondence and, in many cases,
take legal action as a last resort."

Unfortunately, the case against HP was the worst case, where HP do not
have any written procedure and the policy is simply "DENY REFUND"... :-(
Also from a legal point of view, it was the worst case becase the
Justice Of Peace did not recognise the court fees (about 60 Euros), so
at the end I did not practically receive any refund (spent 60 Euros for
the court case, received 61 Euros as refund...).

And actually only Asus have "better policies and clearer procedures"
(they do not ask to send the PC for Product Key removal): all others
manufacturer either not have clear procedures or their policies are unfair.

So I suggest - if possible - to modify the paragraph in this way (if ok,
please, Richard, could you proofread it?):

"Few manufacturers have defined better policies and clearer procedures
for requesting and obtaining refunds. But for most others, consumers are
forced to engage in persistent correspondence and, in many cases, take
legal action as a last resort, as the [collection of cases started by
Luca] show."

[Link to collection]: https://bonissi.it/windowsrefund/

Thanks and sorry again for the delay...
   Luca

[earlier messages snipped]

On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 6:48 AM Bonnie Mehring <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hej Luca,
>
> Thank you for reaching out about this! I have now changed the news item
> and implemented your suggestion:
> https://git.fsfe.org/FSFE/fsfe-website/pulls/5063
>
> Best regards,
> Bonnie
>
> --
> Bonnie Mehring - Project manager -
> Free Software Foundation Europe
> Schönhauser Allee 6/7, 10119 Berlin, Germany | t +49-30-27595290
> Registered at Amtsgericht Hamburg, VR 17030  |(fsfe.org/support)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Translators mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>
> This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All
> participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other:
> https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct



-- 
"The problem with quotes on the internet is that it is difficult to
determine whether or not they are genuine." -- Abraham Lincoln
_______________________________________________
Translators mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All
participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other:
https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct