Just a remark about >This line doesn't make sense in languages where *everything* has a gender: "While 'Julia' is a female name in many parts of the world, the programming language is not a person and does not have a gender." I think that is just not true, for example the direct translation "Auch wenn "Julia" in vielen Teilen der Welt ein weiblicher Name ist, ist die Programmiersprache julia keine Person und hat kein Geschlecht" will not be understood as making a statement about lack grammatical gender.
On Saturday, October 10, 2015 at 1:10:09 PM UTC+2, Scott Jones wrote: > > Thanks for creating this thread, and restarting the important part of > Carlos' comment in the other thread. > > I want to make myself clear, I *do* think that violations of the community > standard should be called out, and that Stefan was right in doing so, > my point was that the community standard should be clearer and correct > about the difference between genderization (which cannot be avoided in many > (most?) languages) > and outright sexualization. > When unnecessary genderization leaks into English (or other languages > where it is possible to use neuter pronouns) (esp. by non-native speakers), > it should be gently pointed out that that can make some people feel > uncomfortable or non included, and is not considered acceptable, esp. in > public forums. > Any anthropomorphism or sexualization is unacceptable, in any language. > > This line doesn't make sense in languages where *everything* has a gender: > >While “Julia” is a female name in many parts of the world, the > programming language is not a person and does not have a gender. > > I propose changing that to: > >> While "Julia" is a female name in many parts of the world, the >> programming language is not a person, and should not be spoken about as if >> it were a person. >> In languages where there are gender neutral forms, those should always be >> used (i.e. it/its instead of she/her). >> Even in languages where that is not possible, care can be taken to make >> clear that one is referring to a language, and not a person. >> For example, in Spanish, one can speak of "El idioma julia" (which uses >> the masculine pronouns), instead of just "Julia". > > > > On Saturday, October 10, 2015 at 6:28:01 AM UTC-4, Tomas Lycken wrote: >> >> Since a recent thread was derailed into discussions about the code of >> conduct in this community, I figured it would be better to move that >> discussion here, in the hopes that the technical discussion in the other >> thread can be picked up again. >> >> As a starting point, here is the actual Julia Community Standards >> document: http://julialang.org/community/standards/ Please take a moment >> to read it, even if you have read it before. It's always good to refresh >> our memories of how we agree to treat each-other. >> >> And before I say anything else about it, I want to give a big shout-out >> to Stefan Karpinski, who has, since I started lurking in these threads >> somwhere in the spring of 2013, consistently enforced these standards >> (whether they existed in written form yet or not) and kept the Julia >> community civil and open (at least as far as I have been able to see). You >> have done this with gentle force - always civil, but never yielding. I >> sincerely hope (and I'm not worried) that you'll keep up the great work in >> this. >> >> In the other thread it was easy to get the impression that a lot of >> people don't agree with Stefan when he calls out standards violations. I >> doubt that's true, and I for one am wholeheartedly on Stefan's - and >> several others' in that thread - side in this. But the fact that this isn't >> obvious, is to me a call-to-action for becoming a more active enforcer of >> the Community Standards myself. If we all chip in, maintaining the >> including environment that is the Julia community will not be a problem, >> even as the community grows larger than what one person can handle. >> >> If you have thoughts on specific passages in the Community Standards, or >> on how they are enforced, this thread is a better place to discuss those >> concerns than a thread that was intended for tech. >> >> // T >> >
