| ▲ | swiftcoder 4 hours ago | |
"not allowed" is probably not a hard constraint. More of a guideline, if you will. | ||
| ▲ | xp84 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |
I'm very curious which languages most people asking about this question speak. In English, indeed, the phrase "(not) allowed" is completely ambiguous and context based! Maybe kind of tense-based as well -- present tense is usually about permission and policy, and past or future tense implies more of an active role. "I don't allow my child to watch TV" - implies that I have a policy which forbids it, but the child might sometimes turn it on if I'm in the other room. "I didn't allow him to watch TV that day" - implies that I was completely successful in preventing him from watching TV. "I won't allow him to watch TV on the airplane" - implies that I plan to fully prevent it. "My company doesn't allow any non-company-provided software to be installed on our company computers" - totally ambiguous. Could be a pure verbal policy with honor-system or just monitoring, or could be fully impossible to do. | ||
| ▲ | cuchoi 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |
yes, exactly. It has permissions to send email, but it is told to not to send emails with human approval. | ||
| ▲ | aeternum 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |
Yes hopefully this is the case. I'd prefer if it were worded more like: He has access to reply but has been told not to reply without human approval. | ||