Fix more issues

.github/actions/spelling/expect.txt

@@ -223,7 +223,6 @@ lejourdapres
 leveloffset
 linting
 lioration
-Lliure
 Llobregat
 Lnading
 Localret
@@ -323,7 +322,6 @@ prioritising
 prioritization
 prioritzation
 privatising
-Programa
 propsoals
 Provincials
 Pueyo

.github/actions/spelling/line_forbidden.patterns

@@ -11,9 +11,6 @@
 # s.b. anymore
 \bany more[,.]
 
-# s.b. GitHub
-(?<![&*.]|// |\btype )\bGithub\b(?![{)])
-
 # s.b. GitLab
 (?<![&*.]|// |\btype )\bGitlab\b(?![{)])
 

docs/en/modules/admin/pages/participants/groups.adoc

@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ image:user_group_new_form.png[New user group form]
 
 |Nickname
 |Required
-|Nickname of your organization, association, collective, group, etc. Do not use spaces nor accents. 20 characters maximum.
+|Nickname of your organization, association, collective, group, etc. Do not use spaces or accents. 20 characters maximum.
 
 |Email
 |Required
@@ -38,11 +38,11 @@ image:user_group_new_form.png[New user group form]
 
 |Document number
 |Optional
-|Used for verifications. Do not use dashes nor spaces.
+|Used for verifications. Do not use dashes and spaces.
 
 |Phone
 |Optional
-|Used for verifications. Do not use dashes nor spaces.
+|Used for verifications. Do not use dashes and spaces.
 
 |===
 

docs/en/modules/features/pages/participatory-spaces.adoc

@@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ Initiatives operate as follows:
 
 * Any person or citizen association can make a citizen-initiative proposal. There are *several types of initiatives* with various numbers of endorsements/signatures required for their processing (these are all configurable). From the initiative-creation page, a description of each of the methods, the number of signatures required and examples (e.g. explanatory videos) can be viewed.
 * To avoid duplicates, once an initiative has been created, the system will present suggestions for **similar initiatives** before continuing with the following step. Once similar proposals have been ruled out, the specific form will be shown for each type of initiative, along with the minimum number of endorsements required. The creator then has an URL at their disposal which can be used to invite others to join in and endorse the initiative. A map is also displayed showing the locations of meeting points to collect signatures should there be any.
-* Once the the initiative has been created, the initiative will move to a **technical moderation and validation** stage, where the City Council’s staff can respond in various ways (by approving it, rejecting it or suggesting amendments).
+* Once the initiative has been created, the initiative will move to a **technical moderation and validation** stage, where the City Council’s staff can respond in various ways (by approving it, rejecting it or suggesting amendments).
 * Initiatives can be monitored and **notifications received on updated** statuses, in addition to which their individual promoter or group can periodically send information newsletters to other uses of the platform who have opted to follow the initiative.
 * On reaching the specified end date, an initiative can have two possible states:
 ** *Rejected*: where it fails to reach the minimum number of signatures, a message will be shown stating "does not meet the number of signatures required" and the initiative's creator will be notified.

docs/en/modules/whitepaper/pages/why-decidim.adoc

@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ The context that has given birth to Decidim is defined by two interconnected phe
 
 1.  In social terms, it had to face the growth of the franchise, incorporating an ever more diverse constituency, and, in the last decades of the XXth century, the rise in cultural diversity, consumerism and the ideology of consumer choice in Western democracies (Laclau & Mouffe, 1985; Sennett, 1977, 1998) that generated an ever-growing variety of desires and perspectives to be listened to and articulated in government action. Furthermore, representation has proven open to systemic practices of nepotism or corruption, usually by powerful economic interests (Buchanan & Tullock, 1962; Peltzmann, 1976). In this context, representative mechanisms have ended up imposing the will of the few over the complex and conflictual wills of the people in public policy.
 2.  The second key challenge of complexity had to do with the reality. As the technoscientific transformation of reality accelerated, the responsibility and complexity of the problems facing public policy (f.i.: climate change) has only increased; and yet many of the systems for detecting social problems and mobilizing social knowledge to address them have remained oligarchic. The attack Friedrich Hayek (1944, 1945) launched on socialist planning can be launched against representative democracy too: reality is too complex for a centralized decision-making system.
-3.  The third challenge of complexity fed back into the previous two: it is the challenge (or meta-challenge) of communication and organization. Mobilizing and organizing the will, the knowledge, and the collective action of society into public policy faced numerous socio-technological limits: the millions of members composing a given social group could not express their will nor contribute their knowledge and effort to address their matters of concernfootnote:[Organization or knowledge may be insufficient to solve the problems facing democracy today. However, we there are reasons to believe they can contribute to do so.]. Still in the XXth century, the infrastructure required to bring an expression of will or knowledge of people distributed geographically or socioeconomically (f.i.: laborally) into a common problem or decision seemed out of reach. Even if they wanted, people could not gather in assemblies or other political processes: people were too many, lived far from each other, had their work schedules, and no free time at all.
+3.  The third challenge of complexity fed back into the previous two: it is the challenge (or meta-challenge) of communication and organization. Mobilizing and organizing the will, the knowledge, and the collective action of society into public policy faced numerous socio-technological limits: the millions of members composing a given social group could not express their will or contribute their knowledge and effort to address their matters of concernfootnote:[Organization or knowledge may be insufficient to solve the problems facing democracy today. However, we there are reasons to believe they can contribute to do so.]. Still in the XXth century, the infrastructure required to bring an expression of will or knowledge of people distributed geographically or socioeconomically (f.i.: laborally) into a common problem or decision seemed out of reach. Even if they wanted, people could not gather in assemblies or other political processes: people were too many, lived far from each other, had their work schedules, and no free time at all.
 
 Representative democracy, where the many elect a few every four years, became a raw and oversimplified articulation of the will and knowledge of the many, in terms of the management by the few. So raw and simplified that it couldn’t solve the problems of society and became one of them: the people’s will was not represented or properly constructed but captured, the real problems were not solved by public representatives, but externalized to the market to be solved, and the problems generated by the market too often remained unsolved.