2 ms·

Ok, I'll admit I didn't know that. This still seems like going an awfully long way out of your way to find something to be offended about. This would be like B

by imgabe 6y ago

Ok, I'll admit I didn't know that. This still seems like going an awfully long way out of your way to find something to be offended about. This would be like British people removing French-derived words from their language, because they were the result of Norman conquest and subjugation. At some point, history is just in the past and language moves on. What is actually in the repository? Is the code correct? Is it efficient? Is there sufficient test coverage? Well, who knows. We spent all our person-hours fiddling with terminology. This will last for a few years until someone finds something to be offended about with the new terms.

httpsterio 6y ago
You are assuming that the hearer would be offended or hurt. This doesn't need to be true in order for initiatives like this to make sense or have a purpose. Words have a history and carry their original intentions with them alongside their current meaning. When you're using a term someone might find offensive, that person might also know that you mean no ill. In cases like those, they can ignore the possible subtle connotations your words could've implied. In other situations, the hearer is unaware of your possible ignorance or motivations, in which cases they might be unsure if you're directly or indirectly trying to imply something offensive or dismissive on purpose. Removing that doubt is simply streamlining the efficiency of communication, making sure that both parties understand each other and what they're saying and meaning.
- imgabe 6y ago
  > Words have a history and carry their original intentions with them alongside their current meaning. Respectfully, I disagree. Words are fluid and shift meanings constantly throughout time. Words are not sentient and do not carry anything in and of themselves. Meanings are assigned by people based on context. It is quite clear from the context where these words are used what meaning is intended. To discern another meaning based on an obsolete and irrelevant context requires deliberate misinterpretation.

by imgabe 6y ago

httpsterio 6y ago

You are assuming that the hearer would be offended or hurt. This doesn't need to be true in order for initiatives like this to make sense or have a purpose. Words have a history and carry their original intentions with them alongside their current meaning. When you're using a term someone might find offensive, that person might also know that you mean no ill. In cases like those, they can ignore the possible subtle connotations your words could've implied. In other situations, the hearer is unaware of your possible ignorance or motivations, in which cases they might be unsure if you're directly or indirectly trying to imply something offensive or dismissive on purpose. Removing that doubt is simply streamlining the efficiency of communication, making sure that both parties understand each other and what they're saying and meaning.

imgabe 6y ago
> Words have a history and carry their original intentions with them alongside their current meaning. Respectfully, I disagree. Words are fluid and shift meanings constantly throughout time. Words are not sentient and do not carry anything in and of themselves. Meanings are assigned by people based on context. It is quite clear from the context where these words are used what meaning is intended. To discern another meaning based on an obsolete and irrelevant context requires deliberate misinterpretation.