Le samedi 15 février 2020, 18:56:21 CET Daniel Pocock a écrit : > There are a lot of words used in various discussions today that have > some bias. > > For example, the word /ban/ is quite disparaging to the victim. Simply > using the word continues the bias. > > From a technical perspective, banning somebody from a mailing list and > censoring somebody on a mailing list are both achieved by clicking the > same button. > > Use the word ban, it leaves a lingering feeling that the volunteer may > have done something questionable. > > Use the word censor, it implies the organization is avoiding some > questions.
Use the word “moderate” it implies something has gone (irrelevantly?) too much or excessive; at opposite: use the word “laxist” it implies it should repress more, use the word “toxic” it implies you’re contaminated (it’s transitive), from an evil you can’t see right-away. Use the word “emotional”, “irrational”, “(over)sensitive” it means it should stop feeling and start thinking instead (as if it was possible); Use the word “cold”, “apathic/insensible” or “uprooted / distached from realities”, it implies you should give more empathy, and understand feelings (as if it could be everything). Use the word “instable” it implies it should change less (easily), Use the word “rigid” it implies it should more; Use the word “flexible” it implies it’s good that it changes, Use the word “stable” it implies it’s bad. Use the words “populist”, “crowd”, “influencable”, it implies it’s bad that too much people are involved; Use the word “democratic”, “participative”, “consensus”, it implies that it’s good. There are countless examples: assertions should be backed with (refutable) implications, (refutable) predictions and (contestable, subjective) objectives. More to come.
