I was surprised given there are many questions which seem worse to me that are perfectly acceptable here (at least on the basis they have some upvotes rather than being closed).
Originally my question followed the pattern of a lot of other questions here. I posted an example of clauses of a contract I had seen and asked how to interpret them and whether an additional clause would be necessary to change that interpretation.
My (mis)understanding of the flaw was is I used a specific example I had seen. I thought that odd as plenty of other questions here do that. I thought I rephrased it to be not specifically about my situation (which actually does not involve the specific contract example I gave anyway as I turned down that job for other reasons).
To my mind answering the question is a matter of understanding how these sorts of contract work or interpreting the law and not providing legal advice which would have to be on a case by case basis. I don't see how answering it would be "giving legal advice without a license"
I reworked the question but it was not enough to get it reopened. So I tried rewriting it completely as protecting employees rights to work on unrelated side projects in their free time
This is also closed. Apparently neither question has removed the flaw. Clearly I do not understand what it really is. Can someone explain?
Is there any safe way to ask the question(s) I am obviously trying to ask which would not suffer the same fate?