Related Posts
Rising Star
GDS didn’t receive this message…
Anyone here who can refer me for internal project for dot net profile.
Garib ko accha account ki khoj hai... Bohot struggle Kiya hai abhi tak ..
fun apart.
If anyone can refer my profile within their project for dot net then that will be great help .
Posi - sa Exp - 7 years Te h - .net ,not angular but willing to do Cognizant
Additional Posts in Law
Today is the kickoff for Well-Being Week in Law, which is about raising awareness around mental health and encouraging action and innovation across the legal profession to improve well-being.
Check out the fantastic resources put together by the wonderful team here: http://ow.ly/ftde50EBZKa
Chief
Rising Star
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
I was told at my first firm never to track changes (I think someone got in trouble for information on their metadata, not sure). At my current firm, no one cares, but I think the best practice is to run your own redlines and avoid track changes when you can. I have to disagree though that it is easier to run redlines than track changes. Track changes is easier.
@A3, lol. 100% agree. The only real downside I can think of to track changes is if the other side made changes (especially to provisions that aren't being negotiated) and then accepts said changes, there's no way I'd know without re-reading the entire agreement, which defeats the process. Hence, if I were only looking out for the red/blue/green highlighted text, I'd inadvertently miss changes made and simultaneously accepted by the other side. I think this is why Big Law firms do redlines. It's a diligence measure.
My only ask is if you're doing redlines, please, please, please, do them in Word.
It’s funny because I’ve seen a HUGE difference in this between law firms and in house. Biglaw always seems to send a clean copy + a PDF markup showing changes. You don’t keep working in the same doc. In-house (at least on commercial deals) is always flipping copies of the same doc and updating the markups via track changes + adding comments. Personally I prefer the latter, but I doubt it would work as well for giant complex agreements. It already starts to break Word if you have too many edits/comments in a 10 pages MSA. Can’t imagine what would happen in a 100 page credit agreement.
I also find the redlines from a software much easier to read than Word track changes.
I have never heard of lawyer's not using Word's red line feature.
That’s wild. Before my new firm, I only saw lawyers used tracked changes maybe once or twice. Sending drafts back and forth to opposing counsel always involved sending a clean and redline version.
I’ve never seen anyone not use track changes
Pro
I always use track changes and then curse my lazy colleagues when they send me back their version without accepting my edits. How do I know if you’re in agreement if you just leave everything?! And then I have to do the clean-up review while accepting edits (mine and theirs). But I do like having tracked changes so I can tell what’s new and when I’m changing my own language versus someone else’s. I didn’t even know there was another way!
You can run a compare when there are tracked changes. Word treats the tracked changes as accepted when it does the comparison. It's super simple.
I never even think about using separate software unless specifically asked.
They accept/reject your changes to let you know whether they ... accept or reject your changes. It's just part of the process for negotiations.
Ive only ever used track changes so I dont know the difference. But once you accept the changes, the copy becomes "clean"... the. Ypu can do yoir own redlining
To most people, redlines and track changes are synonyms...
I absolutely hate track changes. Whenever I get a doc with track changes I accept the changes and save it as a new version on my system. Then I’ll just run a redline using the other software we have which is Litera change pro. It’s easier to have a new version with each draft so you can go back and compare other versions (e.g., v7 against v1)
I've always provided a clean version and track changes version for as long as I've been in house, but we had software that did it when I was at the firm.
With that said, if my outside counsel was making a thing about it when the other side used track changes, I'd probably start looking more carefully at bills because I'd be worried this is a signal that they're inflexible and likely to be churning on things that don't actually matter.
I’ll send a redline (and a clean version) if needed but my default is working in tracked changes. But I’m a tax lawyer.
I think it’s because it’s just one (or two if I’m working with someone else in Tax) colors for me, it’s easier to see/keep track of the changes that I’ve made. I’m not compiling multiple groups’ comments.
This is a big law firm vs in house and also M&A vs other practices difference. I’m in house and HATE PDF redlines and it’s a big pet peeve for general commercial work. We also don’t have a redlining software so that’s not an option. Everything is by word tracked changes and I keep separate versions myself via naming conventions. I’ve only dealt with different set ups when an outside firm is involved.
M&A here too and I feel your pain. I find pdf redlines to be just useless, especially if we are both clearly making changes in word. I am fine as long as you also send a clean version in word that I can compare to the last version I sent you and work off.
Genuinely curious - what is the functional difference? Particularly if you just turn on “simple view” when working off a copy with track changes?
I feel like since I’ve started at my firm, I’ve seen the back and forth revisions just get so messy/sloppy/confusing. I never saw anything like that at my old firm when we sent redlines back and forth (whether to opposing counsel or internally).
I’ve used it in the past. Mainly where docs sent to client for review (ins co., who edited docs) it makes it faster to see what they changed or added and attorney can quickly see if the wording/additions are legal for the case
I can't imagine having strong feelings about this.
No track changes
i disagree. My office uses track changes all the time as you can easily review and make changes or reject them. When we read the decisions of other jjudges this really helpful
At first it's strange but I think it's very easy once you get used to it. just click the marker on the side to toggle between hiding and showing the changes.
I always use Word track changes and it is definitely the custom in my community.
I’m in lit and we use track changes exclusively for internal documents. Running a separate redline is a waste of time. We also tend to use track changes when sending docs back and forth to counsel. When you have multiple iterations, I find track changes much more helpful for keeping track of who suggested what when. Especially with a complicated settlement agreement or some such I need to know who made the change. Major points of discussion then generate conversations in the comments, which is also helpful for keeping track of what the major points of contention are and people’s reasons for making the changes they make.