I'm not exactly sure myself, but every time I open one of the pages, I mentally stumble over the formulations. I think there are two components:
1. The biggest part is that I've simply never seen documentation written in this style, any mentions of "I" or "we" are usually explaining the choices made by the author(s). When skimming documentation I pay more attention to those parts. Here those parts don't have a comparable meaning.
2. The smaller part is that the writing style reminds me of the way brands use mascots with first-person writing to advertise to children. There's not really any other association I have with this way of writing, and it makes me feel like the author either isn't taking the project seriously, or me.
I'm not trying to argue that the documentation should be understood this way, or that it should be changed - but I've stumbled over this multiple times, and can't imagine that it's just me.
1. The biggest part is that I've simply never seen documentation written in this style, any mentions of "I" or "we" are usually explaining the choices made by the author(s). When skimming documentation I pay more attention to those parts. Here those parts don't have a comparable meaning.
2. The smaller part is that the writing style reminds me of the way brands use mascots with first-person writing to advertise to children. There's not really any other association I have with this way of writing, and it makes me feel like the author either isn't taking the project seriously, or me.
I'm not trying to argue that the documentation should be understood this way, or that it should be changed - but I've stumbled over this multiple times, and can't imagine that it's just me.