3 ms·
As a synonym for "inexplicably, self-destructively foolish", the word "retarded" is effective, illustrative, and even more concise. As I said elsewhere downthr
by nate_meurer 6y ago
As a synonym for "inexplicably, self-destructively foolish", the word "retarded" is effective, illustrative, and even more concise. As I said elsewhere downthread, I can't offhand come up with a better single phrase to describe the crew in charge of the E-Ink patents. And yes, I'm sure that says more about my limited linguistic faculties than anything else.
I do think it's important to point out that your taken offense is entirely your opinion. You are certainly entitled to that opinion, and I trust that you're coming from a good place, but I feel it's also important to acknowledge the occasional usefulness of language that you might be personally offended by.
- 6gvONxR4sf7o 6y ago> it's also important to acknowledge the occasional usefulness of language that you might be personally offended by. I appreciate the emphasis on usefulness rather than right or wrong. I certainly didn’t interpret “inexplicably, self-destructively foolish” when I read the comment and apparently that extends to others too, which also speaks to usefulness or lack thereof. On the internet, writing anonymously to a large anonymous group is very very much communication on hard mode. Things like Poe’s law reign supreme. If your goal is to get idea X into as many of the comment readers’ heads as possible, then it’s useful to use language that means the same thing to as many of those readers as possible. I think that’s what people mean when they talk about “inclusive” language? The HN style generally seems to be choosing the clear inclusive phrasing over the stylistic(?) phrasing, choosing “inexplicably, self-destructively foolish” over “literally retarded.” (Not trying to be language police. Just a language nerd who likes to talk about language.)