Remove pronoun I from voice for lack of lone addressor

There is no single author listed, the credits are to the
GitHub team, so match up narration to fit that angle.

Pulls it back from single author perspective driving it that
may have existed long ago.

remotes/index.html

@@ -100,7 +100,7 @@ origin	git@github.com:github/git-reference.git (push)
     adds <code>[url]</code> under a local remote named <code>[alias]</code>.</p>
 
     <p>For example, if we want to share our Hello World program with the world,
-    we can create a new repository on a server (I'll use GitHub as an example),
+    we can create a new repository on a server (Using GitHub as an example),
     which should give you a URL, in this case "git@github.com:schacon/hw.git".
     To add that to our project so we can push to it and fetch updates from it
     we would do this:</p>
@@ -117,8 +117,8 @@ github	git@github.com:schacon/hw.git (push)
     has no special meaning but is widely used because <code>git init</code>
     sets it up by default, 'origin' is often used as a remote name because
     <code>git clone</code> sets it up by default as the cloned-from URL. In
-    this case I've decided to name my remote 'github', but I could have really
-    named it just about anything.
+    this case we'll name the remote 'github', but you could name it just
+    about anything.
     </p>
 
     <h4>
@@ -266,10 +266,10 @@ fatal: No such remote 'guhflub'
     <p>The second command that will fetch down new data from a remote server is
     <code>git pull</code>.  This command will basically run a <code>git fetch</code>
     immediately followed by a <code>git merge</code> of the branch on that remote
-    that is tracked by whatever branch you are currently in.  I personally don't much
-    like this command - I prefer running <code>fetch</code> and <code>merge</code>
-    separately.  Less magic, less problems.  However, if you like this idea, you
-    can read about it in more detail in the
+    that is tracked by whatever branch you are currently in.  Running the
+    <code>fetch</code> and <code>merge</code> commands separately involves less magic
+    and less problems, but if you like the idea of <code>pull</code>, you can
+    read about it in more detail in the
     <a target="new" href="http://git-scm.com/docs/git-pull">official docs</a>.
     </p>
 
@@ -277,9 +277,9 @@ fatal: No such remote 'guhflub'
     would first run <code>git fetch [alias]</code> to tell Git to fetch down all the
     data it has that you do not, then you would run <code>git merge [alias]/[branch]</code>
     to merge into your current branch anything new you see on the server
-    (like if someone else has pushed in the meantime). So, if I were working on my
-    Hello World project with several other people and I wanted to bring in any changes
-    that had been pushed since I last connected, I would do something like this:</p>
+    (like if someone else has pushed in the meantime). So, if you were working on a
+    Hello World project with several other people and wanted to bring in any changes
+    that had been pushed since we last connected, we would do something like this:</p>
 
 <pre>
 <b>$ git fetch github</b>
@@ -296,17 +296,17 @@ From github.com:schacon/hw
  * [new branch]      lisp       -> github/lisp
 </pre>
 
-    <p>I can see that since the last time I synchronized with this remote, five branches
+    <p>Here we can see that since we last synchronized with this remote, five branches
     have been added or updated.  The 'ada' and 'lisp' branches are new, where the
-    'master', 'c-langs' and 'java' branches have been updated.  In this case, my team
-    is pushing proposed updates to remote branches for review before they're merged
-    into 'master'.
+    'master', 'c-langs' and 'java' branches have been updated.  In our example case,
+    other developers are pushing proposed updates to remote branches for review before
+    they're merged into 'master'.
     </p>
 
     <p>You can see the mapping that Git makes.  The 'master' branch on the remote
-    repository becomes a branch named 'github/master' locally.  That way now I can
-    merge the 'master' branch on that remote into my local 'master' branch by running
-    <code>git merge github/master</code>.  Or, I can see what new commits are on that
+    repository becomes a branch named 'github/master' locally.  That way you can
+    merge the 'master' branch on that remote into the local 'master' branch by running
+    <code>git merge github/master</code>.  Or, you can see what new commits are on that
     branch by running <code>git log github/master ^master</code>.  If your remote
     is named 'origin' it would be <code>origin/master</code> instead.  Almost any
     command you would run using local branches you can use remote branches with too.
@@ -356,10 +356,10 @@ To git@github.com:schacon/hw.git
 </pre>
 
     <p>Pretty easy. Now if someone clones that repository they will get exactly
-    what I have committed and all of its history.</p>
+    what we have committed and all of its history.</p>
 
-    <p>What if I have a topic branch like the 'erlang' branch we created earlier
-    and I just want to share that?  You can just push that branch instead.</p>
+    <p>What if you have a topic branch like the 'erlang' branch created earlier
+    and want to share just that?  You can just push that branch instead.</p>
 
 <pre>
 <b>$ git push github erlang</b>