I agree that it's much cleaner without the double negative.

Double negatives come up a lot in my field: the law. In California, for example, juries in criminal cases are instructed that "reasonable doubt" means something “that leaves the minds of the jurors in that condition that they cannot say that they feel an abiding conviction . . . of the truth of the charge.”

The law is not without other examples. (I slay myself.)

For those who'd like to read more, please see http://thepartyofthefirstpart.blogspot.com/2007/04/column-twelve-confused-men.html