Public Access
fix(freelancer-directory): apply the ICP re-review — claims sweep, F1 gate
- F2: 'We publish exactly what you write' -> 'We publish what you write — after we check it: your photo, your email address and for spam' (the page's own consent line + photo check + spam gate made the absolute false) - claims sweep: drop the 'no claim we cannot back' meta-claim and the 'not through an agency' absolute; state the individual rule as the declaration we ask for, and make the card's individual tag read '(as declared)' to match the OCA tag - F3: directory lede now says the individual rule is a declaration, not a fact - F4: 'How this works' 110 -> 44 words (three short lines, no relay promise) - F5: count framed as 'a number we recorded' (owner-typed, not derived); photo hint agrees with its '(optional)' label; kicker 'ODOO COMMUNITY FREELANCERS' -> 'ODOO FREELANCERS' and the meta/og drop 'Odoo Community' so an Enterprise client is not invited to self-exclude - F1: the request and invite forms SHIP DARK — their endpoint constants are empty and the forms stay hidden behind a plain 'not open yet' line (no submit, so no false confirmation); the invite copy carries the one-click opt-out line the ICP asked for before the form returns
This commit is contained in:
1 parent
c55c707694
commit
4d5d59f3bd
2 files changed
+78
-41
No files matched your search
@@ -233,7 +233,7 @@
|
||||
<div class="form-field">
|
||||
<label for="adClients">Projects on ODOO4projects</label>
|
||||
<input id="adClients" name="odoo4projects_clients" type="number" min="0" />
|
||||
<span class="hint">Our own count, not the freelancer's.</span>
|
||||
<span class="hint">A number we record ourselves — not the freelancer's, not a rating.</span>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
<div class="form-field">
|
||||
<label for="adFocus">Focus</label>
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in new issue
Block a user