6 ms·

I for one think it's great that people are willing to make things a little more accessible for more people. If people want to be part of our community of develo

I for one think it's great that people are willing to make things a little more accessible for more people. If people want to be part of our community of developers I think it's great that these organizations listen to people who might have a problem with certain terminology. Even though I don't have a problem with those terms, I think it's still worth evaluating if they're worth keeping if it makes it harder for someone to be part of our community. Hope more of you feel the same, as I'm getting kind of tired of the "the SJWs are at it again" shtick. There's also legitimate reasons to why these changes are necessary outside of some loud obnoxious screams from certain SJW-like people, that yes, are annoying to hear. Some of the response from our community to "push back against this" is just equally weird, tone deaf and childish however. Say what you want, be we all know we've done silly refactors over smaller things. So don't make this bigger than it should be: it's about making our community bigger by making it easier for people to be part of it!

hYKdTfpa 6y ago
>I for one think it's great that people are willing to make things a little more accessible for more people. How does this make anything more accessible for anyone?
- eli 6y ago
  It evokes slavery and makes some people feel unwelcome. Many other projects have made similar changes to their own repos (eg Go made the same switch) and there has been quite a lot written on the topic if you google around.
- SquareWheel 6y ago
  Considering you created an account just to post in this thread, and your comments imply a very clear bias, it's rather obvious you're not asking this question in good faith.
  - temporama1 6y ago
    He's probably created an anonymous account because we live in a world where you may well lose your job for even questioning that a _source control branch name_ might offend someone. An opinion that - in the real world - the vast majority agree with.
    - rualca 6y ago
      Trying to portray the use of terms like master-slave as something that "might offend someone" is a complete misrepresentation of the issue, and one that is spawned from bad faith. The overall goal is inclusiveness. The goal is not centered around whether an expression offends, but whether an arbitrary naming choice does not help accommodate other people or if it might bring discussions and debates over personal matters some people feel strongly about. A few decades back, there was a common rule of thumb that was quite simple: do not discuss politics or religion in the workplace. The reasoning is straight-forward and simple to understand: if you wish to work somewhere where coworkers do not antagonize other coworkers for stupid personal reasons then you simply didn't opened the door to discussions about stupid personal matters.
- oap_bram 6y ago
  There are plenty of people in our society that actually have a negative relationship to these terms that we commonly use in our profession. Psychologically, it can be harder to be part of a group of people or a profession when you have to use these terms, therefor lowering accessibility. This can be because of stigma enforcing terminology (such is the case of master/slave for some people). These are usually not effects experienced by the majority that's fine with those terms however, which makes it hard to empathize with people that do struggle. Unfortunately, people seem to think that rationality without empathy is always the road to a good conclusion. When you do it in these contexts, however, you're actively excluding those who you fail to empathize with.
  - cobraetor 6y ago
    Please stop speaking up on behalf of African Americans without consulting their own opinion on this matter. I'm one and not even my Black friends care about this silly posturing from White progressives. We are frankly getting tired of this virtue signalling while the American society doesn't give a shit about actual Black problems. What is "rationality without empathy"? Have you tried getting off that armchair and tried talking to poor Black people to understand how they feel?
    - oap_bram 6y ago
      Yes I have. Very weird for you to assume I don't. I don't live in America, however I am constantly reminded of my country's (The Netherlands) colonial past (you know, the spice trading, genocide inducing, slave trading one) and the repercussions of that. My city's suburban neighborhoods are filled with people of lower class of all different types of ethnicities. I've done as much as I could in the last few years to emancipate them, and as such I have ran into these "language problems" before, even in Dutch, even in different places than tech. To act as if our community does not have those issues, or to think that I do not have anything meaningful to say because I'm in an "armchair" doesn't make sense. I'm not American, I'm not speaking on behalf of African Americans, I'm speaking on behalf of myself and my own experience. I don't necessarily think this will persuade you to think differently however, so yeah. Keep your opinion, but don't assume my circumstance based on your subjective experience.
temporama1 6y ago
The number of people that _genuinely_ have a problem with the word "master" (excluding all the weird (white) twitter people) is close to zero.
- growse 6y ago
  How many people have a problem with the word 'main'?
  - temporama1 6y ago
    Nobody had a problem with "master" 18 months ago. Including you.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  - souprock 6y ago
    If 4chan can cause an issue with the "OK" symbol, "main" should be easy for them to mess with. C and C++ will just have to change, along with street names and large water pipes.
- salmo 6y ago
  In most places this is true. But working in Plantation heavy part of the South, it’s awkward. Read it in a Southern white male accent to someone whose grandparents were sharecroppers in the Delta. We lose a lot of black talent to other industries, non technical roles in IT, and other locations despite good pay/cost of living. My black friend from high school on my team who is not overly sensitive and I have open conversations on race with has says it occasionally makes him cringe. I try to maintain an environment that’s sensitive to people’s real feelings, because I want them all to enjoy work. Not PC BS, but thinking about who needs to be asked to speak up, who needs more quiet time, etc. Probably hearing it in a different accent would make it more divorced from the past. This alone obviously won’t fix anything. But it’s one less thing to make people feel uncomfortable, and it doesn’t cost anything except a naming convention. People talk about diversity as if it’s just helping minorities. But working with low and high functioning teams over the years, my experience is that a happy diverse team is productive and creates a better product. I think including more perspectives in a job that is creative creates better results earlier in the process.
kyrieeschaton 6y ago
Anyone who believes that "master" is some kind of slur and takes the opportunity to take offense over it is not someone you want causing problems in your organization.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- eli 6y ago
  I feel that way about people who lack empathy
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- JosephRedfern 6y ago
  Where is this imaginary line between “ok to be offended” and “not ok to be offended”? Who decides where that line is? If you can trivially avoid even the risk of offending someone — especially in a professional context — then why wouldn’t you?
  - swat535 6y ago
    How is making a change that impacts people globally (which includes non English speakers) to mildly please a tiny portion of loud people trivial?
    - stnmtn 6y ago
      How big of a change is this for you? I mean seriously?
- oap_bram 6y ago
  I dont know, I was taught from a very young age to be nice. And honestly, I kinda of kept it as a close part of my personality to not make anyone feel uncomfortable for any reason. Although I can argue most of these things from a political angle, I also feel like "making people feel more welcome" is a goal in and of itself, and therefor can't be overlooked. Honestly, I feel like if you would have a problem with a particular community you would like to have it resolved too right? I just don't think that it's ever been about terminology because you never had to feel uncomfortable because of it. That's not bad however, but it's easy to forget that if you don't relate to someone subjective reality, doesn't mean it's any less real.
cuddlecake 6y ago
I don't like the continuing insinuation that there's "some loud obnoxious screams from certain SJW-like people". Usually it's just loud obnoxious screams from Anti-SJW people, and people blindly following the call to arms against what they call "SJW bullshit".
- oap_bram 6y ago
  Yeah that's true, and I feel you on that. It's just that when conversing with people that do feel like these "SJWs" exist, makes it seem more nuanced, since you're distancing yourself from that stigma even though you're saying things relatively similar to SJWs. Honestly, I just do it avoid being called one, even though I'm not in any way close to something that could be defined as a SJW.
mswtk 6y ago
> I for one think it's great that people are willing to make things a little more accessible for more people. If people want to be part of our community of developers I think it's great that these organizations listen to people who might have a problem with certain terminology. Even though I don't have a problem with those terms, I think it's still worth evaluating if they're worth keeping if it makes it harder for someone to be part of our community. Is it more accessible? As in, is this change driven by complaints from actual people who feel excluded by the terminology? As far as I'm aware, none of the projects making these changes even claims that, it's all speculation on behalf of hypothetical offended parties. Not that it really makes it less annoying to have terminology used by people from all over the world be dictated by American cultural sensibilities, but it's easier to stomach if there's some material justification behind the change.
- oap_bram 6y ago
  I don't know, I can't speak for the people who's access is limited. However, I am Dutch and can say that these cultural sensibilities are far outside of just the "American" one. There are plenty of people that struggle with this terminology in a realistic way. Even if you can't find anecdotal evidence of someone being offended by this, you can rationally come to the conclusion that it might be worth changing it. And for it to be accessible, it doesn't need to come 100% from the people that face problems with the terminology. If it were to be 100% those people, than it would be a great from of cultural emancipation however!
  - mswtk 6y ago
    I mean, I don't think it's unreasonable to ask for at least a couple actual examples of this change helping people feel better about participating in technology. In the absence of such, it all feels very performative and, dare I say, a cheap way to score good PR for participating organizations. I don't think it really hurts anyone to an extent that it should be opposed, but neither does it really help, until proven otherwise. > However, I am Dutch and can say that these cultural sensibilities are far outside of just the "American" one. Are they? Does the master/slave terminology also have very negative connotations in your culture? I thought it was almost exclusively an American thing due to their historical circumstances.
loeg 6y ago
> Say what you want, be we all know we've done silly refactors over smaller things. As a very very junior dev, I had "nuke" in a function name, and logging that included the function's name. Turns out Japanese customers are not super big fans of nukes. Lesson learned, small change made, life goes on.
macspoofing 6y ago
>There's also legitimate reasons to why these changes are necessary outside of some loud obnoxious screams from certain SJW-like people, that yes, are annoying to hear. Some of the response from our community to "push back against this" is just equally weird, tone deaf and childish however. I understand your perspective. I'm not against changing the term. We changed it in our product a few years ago (master-slave to primary-secondary) as well ... primarily because even if you offend one (current or potential) customer it's just not a hill worth dying on. But to address your point though, I wish there was some acknowledgment by 'the SJWs' (as you put it) that even if the term is archaic and should change, the tech community simply used a descriptive dictionary term for a particular architecture, and therefore the term is wholly unconnected to 'white supremacy' or 'systemic racism' or 'unconscious bias'. But for many who raise these issues, there is no good-will or charity. And that's why there is pushback. Many people don't want to accept the position that they were purposely insulting other people when these terms were in widespread use.
- oap_bram 6y ago
  > Many people don't want to accept the position that they were purposely insulting other people when these terms were in widespread use. True, but I think it's important to notice that you're not purposely insulting people until you start defending this terminology that can be oppressive for some people. Everyone in this entire thread had the opportunity to go "you know what, if this makes someone feel unwelcome, I get that. Perhaps a good idea to change it". It's when people start defending something that is both "so unimportant that they don't understand" but also super important that it doesn't change just gives a really weird vibe. I just can't seem to understand why people are so unwilling to just be a little bit more welcoming, even if it is hypothetical according to them.
  - macspoofing 6y ago
    In general I find tech to be a very welcoming industry, especially compared to every other industry. I think there's a human issue that is happening, namely, if you come in with a negative and accusatory energy people will be turned off by that, get very defensive, and mirror your energy back at you. That's not a tech thing, but a human thing. And yes, many people do feel beaten down with constant accusations of ill will. This is why the principle of goodwill and charity (i.e. assuming the best intentions of people) is so important for all sides.
easytiger 6y ago
> I for one think it's great that people are willing to make things a little more accessible for more people. This doesn't achieve that. It very clearly does nothing. Human beings as basic pattern matching engines have been hacked by things like twitter to amplify beyond reasonableness many concepts and ideas which they are shown as related and then regurgitate and spread. Whilst this in particular may not be "important" it is certainly but one minor example of a very serious trend that is demonstrating a very low latency mechanism at play for creating fast paced change in western society that undermines the strengths of slow change that made it so successful. Now you might be the kind of person who might have a desire to see those fundamentals undermined under a guise of faux altruistic reasonableness, I don't know, but the overly simplistic acceptance of it indicates an avoidance of any of the reasons why people might be resistant to it. Thus why i question your motivations here.
africanboy 6y ago
As an Italian, let's talk about spaghetti code then :)
swiley 6y ago
I think it's important to be inclusive. I'm not against this but there are definitely situations where this has gone too far. I've started to notice some companies completely excluding white men from PR images and not sending them to events which is super weird and definitely not inclusive.

hYKdTfpa 6y ago

>I for one think it's great that people are willing to make things a little more accessible for more people. How does this make anything more accessible for anyone?

eli 6y ago
It evokes slavery and makes some people feel unwelcome. Many other projects have made similar changes to their own repos (eg Go made the same switch) and there has been quite a lot written on the topic if you google around.
SquareWheel 6y ago
Considering you created an account just to post in this thread, and your comments imply a very clear bias, it's rather obvious you're not asking this question in good faith.
- temporama1 6y ago
  He's probably created an anonymous account because we live in a world where you may well lose your job for even questioning that a _source control branch name_ might offend someone. An opinion that - in the real world - the vast majority agree with.
  - rualca 6y ago
    Trying to portray the use of terms like master-slave as something that "might offend someone" is a complete misrepresentation of the issue, and one that is spawned from bad faith. The overall goal is inclusiveness. The goal is not centered around whether an expression offends, but whether an arbitrary naming choice does not help accommodate other people or if it might bring discussions and debates over personal matters some people feel strongly about. A few decades back, there was a common rule of thumb that was quite simple: do not discuss politics or religion in the workplace. The reasoning is straight-forward and simple to understand: if you wish to work somewhere where coworkers do not antagonize other coworkers for stupid personal reasons then you simply didn't opened the door to discussions about stupid personal matters.
oap_bram 6y ago
There are plenty of people in our society that actually have a negative relationship to these terms that we commonly use in our profession. Psychologically, it can be harder to be part of a group of people or a profession when you have to use these terms, therefor lowering accessibility. This can be because of stigma enforcing terminology (such is the case of master/slave for some people). These are usually not effects experienced by the majority that's fine with those terms however, which makes it hard to empathize with people that do struggle. Unfortunately, people seem to think that rationality without empathy is always the road to a good conclusion. When you do it in these contexts, however, you're actively excluding those who you fail to empathize with.
- cobraetor 6y ago
  Please stop speaking up on behalf of African Americans without consulting their own opinion on this matter. I'm one and not even my Black friends care about this silly posturing from White progressives. We are frankly getting tired of this virtue signalling while the American society doesn't give a shit about actual Black problems. What is "rationality without empathy"? Have you tried getting off that armchair and tried talking to poor Black people to understand how they feel?
  - oap_bram 6y ago
    Yes I have. Very weird for you to assume I don't. I don't live in America, however I am constantly reminded of my country's (The Netherlands) colonial past (you know, the spice trading, genocide inducing, slave trading one) and the repercussions of that. My city's suburban neighborhoods are filled with people of lower class of all different types of ethnicities. I've done as much as I could in the last few years to emancipate them, and as such I have ran into these "language problems" before, even in Dutch, even in different places than tech. To act as if our community does not have those issues, or to think that I do not have anything meaningful to say because I'm in an "armchair" doesn't make sense. I'm not American, I'm not speaking on behalf of African Americans, I'm speaking on behalf of myself and my own experience. I don't necessarily think this will persuade you to think differently however, so yeah. Keep your opinion, but don't assume my circumstance based on your subjective experience.

temporama1 6y ago

The number of people that _genuinely_ have a problem with the word "master" (excluding all the weird (white) twitter people) is close to zero.

growse 6y ago
How many people have a problem with the word 'main'?
- temporama1 6y ago
  Nobody had a problem with "master" 18 months ago. Including you.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- souprock 6y ago
  If 4chan can cause an issue with the "OK" symbol, "main" should be easy for them to mess with. C and C++ will just have to change, along with street names and large water pipes.
salmo 6y ago
In most places this is true. But working in Plantation heavy part of the South, it’s awkward. Read it in a Southern white male accent to someone whose grandparents were sharecroppers in the Delta. We lose a lot of black talent to other industries, non technical roles in IT, and other locations despite good pay/cost of living. My black friend from high school on my team who is not overly sensitive and I have open conversations on race with has says it occasionally makes him cringe. I try to maintain an environment that’s sensitive to people’s real feelings, because I want them all to enjoy work. Not PC BS, but thinking about who needs to be asked to speak up, who needs more quiet time, etc. Probably hearing it in a different accent would make it more divorced from the past. This alone obviously won’t fix anything. But it’s one less thing to make people feel uncomfortable, and it doesn’t cost anything except a naming convention. People talk about diversity as if it’s just helping minorities. But working with low and high functioning teams over the years, my experience is that a happy diverse team is productive and creates a better product. I think including more perspectives in a job that is creative creates better results earlier in the process.

kyrieeschaton 6y ago

Anyone who believes that "master" is some kind of slur and takes the opportunity to take offense over it is not someone you want causing problems in your organization.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
eli 6y ago
I feel that way about people who lack empathy
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
JosephRedfern 6y ago
Where is this imaginary line between “ok to be offended” and “not ok to be offended”? Who decides where that line is? If you can trivially avoid even the risk of offending someone — especially in a professional context — then why wouldn’t you?
- swat535 6y ago
  How is making a change that impacts people globally (which includes non English speakers) to mildly please a tiny portion of loud people trivial?
  - stnmtn 6y ago
    How big of a change is this for you? I mean seriously?
oap_bram 6y ago
I dont know, I was taught from a very young age to be nice. And honestly, I kinda of kept it as a close part of my personality to not make anyone feel uncomfortable for any reason. Although I can argue most of these things from a political angle, I also feel like "making people feel more welcome" is a goal in and of itself, and therefor can't be overlooked. Honestly, I feel like if you would have a problem with a particular community you would like to have it resolved too right? I just don't think that it's ever been about terminology because you never had to feel uncomfortable because of it. That's not bad however, but it's easy to forget that if you don't relate to someone subjective reality, doesn't mean it's any less real.

cuddlecake 6y ago

I don't like the continuing insinuation that there's "some loud obnoxious screams from certain SJW-like people". Usually it's just loud obnoxious screams from Anti-SJW people, and people blindly following the call to arms against what they call "SJW bullshit".

oap_bram 6y ago
Yeah that's true, and I feel you on that. It's just that when conversing with people that do feel like these "SJWs" exist, makes it seem more nuanced, since you're distancing yourself from that stigma even though you're saying things relatively similar to SJWs. Honestly, I just do it avoid being called one, even though I'm not in any way close to something that could be defined as a SJW.

mswtk 6y ago

> I for one think it's great that people are willing to make things a little more accessible for more people. If people want to be part of our community of developers I think it's great that these organizations listen to people who might have a problem with certain terminology. Even though I don't have a problem with those terms, I think it's still worth evaluating if they're worth keeping if it makes it harder for someone to be part of our community. Is it more accessible? As in, is this change driven by complaints from actual people who feel excluded by the terminology? As far as I'm aware, none of the projects making these changes even claims that, it's all speculation on behalf of hypothetical offended parties. Not that it really makes it less annoying to have terminology used by people from all over the world be dictated by American cultural sensibilities, but it's easier to stomach if there's some material justification behind the change.

oap_bram 6y ago
I don't know, I can't speak for the people who's access is limited. However, I am Dutch and can say that these cultural sensibilities are far outside of just the "American" one. There are plenty of people that struggle with this terminology in a realistic way. Even if you can't find anecdotal evidence of someone being offended by this, you can rationally come to the conclusion that it might be worth changing it. And for it to be accessible, it doesn't need to come 100% from the people that face problems with the terminology. If it were to be 100% those people, than it would be a great from of cultural emancipation however!
- mswtk 6y ago
  I mean, I don't think it's unreasonable to ask for at least a couple actual examples of this change helping people feel better about participating in technology. In the absence of such, it all feels very performative and, dare I say, a cheap way to score good PR for participating organizations. I don't think it really hurts anyone to an extent that it should be opposed, but neither does it really help, until proven otherwise. > However, I am Dutch and can say that these cultural sensibilities are far outside of just the "American" one. Are they? Does the master/slave terminology also have very negative connotations in your culture? I thought it was almost exclusively an American thing due to their historical circumstances.

loeg 6y ago

> Say what you want, be we all know we've done silly refactors over smaller things. As a very very junior dev, I had "nuke" in a function name, and logging that included the function's name. Turns out Japanese customers are not super big fans of nukes. Lesson learned, small change made, life goes on.

macspoofing 6y ago

>There's also legitimate reasons to why these changes are necessary outside of some loud obnoxious screams from certain SJW-like people, that yes, are annoying to hear. Some of the response from our community to "push back against this" is just equally weird, tone deaf and childish however. I understand your perspective. I'm not against changing the term. We changed it in our product a few years ago (master-slave to primary-secondary) as well ... primarily because even if you offend one (current or potential) customer it's just not a hill worth dying on. But to address your point though, I wish there was some acknowledgment by 'the SJWs' (as you put it) that even if the term is archaic and should change, the tech community simply used a descriptive dictionary term for a particular architecture, and therefore the term is wholly unconnected to 'white supremacy' or 'systemic racism' or 'unconscious bias'. But for many who raise these issues, there is no good-will or charity. And that's why there is pushback. Many people don't want to accept the position that they were purposely insulting other people when these terms were in widespread use.

oap_bram 6y ago
> Many people don't want to accept the position that they were purposely insulting other people when these terms were in widespread use. True, but I think it's important to notice that you're not purposely insulting people until you start defending this terminology that can be oppressive for some people. Everyone in this entire thread had the opportunity to go "you know what, if this makes someone feel unwelcome, I get that. Perhaps a good idea to change it". It's when people start defending something that is both "so unimportant that they don't understand" but also super important that it doesn't change just gives a really weird vibe. I just can't seem to understand why people are so unwilling to just be a little bit more welcoming, even if it is hypothetical according to them.
- macspoofing 6y ago
  In general I find tech to be a very welcoming industry, especially compared to every other industry. I think there's a human issue that is happening, namely, if you come in with a negative and accusatory energy people will be turned off by that, get very defensive, and mirror your energy back at you. That's not a tech thing, but a human thing. And yes, many people do feel beaten down with constant accusations of ill will. This is why the principle of goodwill and charity (i.e. assuming the best intentions of people) is so important for all sides.

easytiger 6y ago

> I for one think it's great that people are willing to make things a little more accessible for more people. This doesn't achieve that. It very clearly does nothing. Human beings as basic pattern matching engines have been hacked by things like twitter to amplify beyond reasonableness many concepts and ideas which they are shown as related and then regurgitate and spread. Whilst this in particular may not be "important" it is certainly but one minor example of a very serious trend that is demonstrating a very low latency mechanism at play for creating fast paced change in western society that undermines the strengths of slow change that made it so successful. Now you might be the kind of person who might have a desire to see those fundamentals undermined under a guise of faux altruistic reasonableness, I don't know, but the overly simplistic acceptance of it indicates an avoidance of any of the reasons why people might be resistant to it. Thus why i question your motivations here.

africanboy 6y ago

As an Italian, let's talk about spaghetti code then :)

swiley 6y ago

I think it's important to be inclusive. I'm not against this but there are definitely situations where this has gone too far. I've started to notice some companies completely excluding white men from PR images and not sending them to events which is super weird and definitely not inclusive.