review words in Planning Alerts for references to institutions vs humans

[katska]

We're all humans here. We become separated by dehumanising language. This disempowers too. When one thinks of talking to humans about a conversation we have a legitimate place in, that's very different from a position of a single person railing against an institution. De-emphasize the institutions and help see that its all just humans.

From that position, consider the language of Planning Alerts, and evaluate if reference to a whole institution can be replaced by a department, a person, or people. For example instead of council (which doesn't always work, because we cover more than councils) can we say "planners" instead?

While we want to use words people are familiar with, we also can be agents for meaningful purposeful change in the language that's used day to day. In changing the language, people can have a different set of expectations, to open doors, walk in and have a say.

Use this issue to note where there is potential for change, noting the URL, paragraph and suggestion if there is one.
Also where are there references to institutions that seem either benign, actively useful or hard to change? And why?

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because there has been no activity on it for about six months. If you want to keep it open please make a comment and explain why this issue is still relevant. Otherwise it will be automatically closed in a week. Thank you!