5 ms·

BITO was uninhabited before it was settled by Europeans. It doesn't have "native people" according to Wikipedia. Unlike .us/au/ca etc. Are those tlds controlled

by mahkoh 6y ago

BITO was uninhabited before it was settled by Europeans. It doesn't have "native people" according to Wikipedia. Unlike .us/au/ca etc. Are those tlds controlled by their native people?

robinoh 6y ago
> On 22 May 2019, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution [...] demanding that the United Kingdom unconditionally withdraw its colonial administration from the area within six months. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expulsion_of_the_Chagossians#2018_ICJ_hearing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expulsion_of_the_Chagossians#2...
- zzanak 6y ago
  Any reason to downvote? PS I think it could a good idea to require some reason when downvoting, otherwise sometimes the context for doing that is completely unclear.
  - forgotmypw17 6y ago
    Many communities have adopted the downvote reason functionality, as well as upvote reason.
3131s 6y ago
> BITO was uninhabited before it was settled by Europeans. This is completely wrong. BIOT includes these islands where the native people were forcibly removed and the story is terrible. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chagossians https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chagossians https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expulsion_of_the_Chagossians https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expulsion_of_the_Chagossians It's not like this hasn't been discussed many times on HN before. I own a .io but come on!
- makomk 6y ago
  The Chagossians aren't a counter-example to that at all - they were moved to the islands by European colonialists as a slave labour force, which as I understand it were uninhabited before.
  - 3131s 6y ago
    What, did you expect a new lineage of humans to evolve separately there or something? Of course "native" can be arbitrarily limited to mean 1000s or 10,000s of years, but even after slavery those people lived there for at least five or six generations. So from the perspective of the people being forcibly removed, getting their pet dogs gassed by the military, it really wouldn't fucking matter. And the Wikipedia article says they're "native", which you explicitly claimed was not the case.
lern_too_spel 6y ago
That's not a relevant statement. It has people who were living there before the British controlled the islands.

by mahkoh 6y ago

BITO was uninhabited before it was settled by Europeans. It doesn't have "native people" according to Wikipedia. Unlike .us/au/ca etc. Are those tlds controlled by their native people?

robinoh 6y ago

> On 22 May 2019, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution [...] demanding that the United Kingdom unconditionally withdraw its colonial administration from the area within six months. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expulsion_of_the_Chagossians#2018_ICJ_hearing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expulsion_of_the_Chagossians#2...

zzanak 6y ago
Any reason to downvote? PS I think it could a good idea to require some reason when downvoting, otherwise sometimes the context for doing that is completely unclear.
- forgotmypw17 6y ago
  Many communities have adopted the downvote reason functionality, as well as upvote reason.

3131s 6y ago

> BITO was uninhabited before it was settled by Europeans. This is completely wrong. BIOT includes these islands where the native people were forcibly removed and the story is terrible. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chagossians https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chagossians https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expulsion_of_the_Chagossians https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expulsion_of_the_Chagossians It's not like this hasn't been discussed many times on HN before. I own a .io but come on!

makomk 6y ago
The Chagossians aren't a counter-example to that at all - they were moved to the islands by European colonialists as a slave labour force, which as I understand it were uninhabited before.
- 3131s 6y ago
  What, did you expect a new lineage of humans to evolve separately there or something? Of course "native" can be arbitrarily limited to mean 1000s or 10,000s of years, but even after slavery those people lived there for at least five or six generations. So from the perspective of the people being forcibly removed, getting their pet dogs gassed by the military, it really wouldn't fucking matter. And the Wikipedia article says they're "native", which you explicitly claimed was not the case.

lern_too_spel 6y ago

That's not a relevant statement. It has people who were living there before the British controlled the islands.