The practice of systematic erasure of language regresses to human
ideas. Language policing has inertia and a kind of gravity that starts
removing tangential-but-uncontroversial ideas as a byproduct; dangerous
and anti-human! Appropriate usage of the term "Black" is not racist.
Not hiring someone or usurping opportunity because of skin color is
racist. Maintaining a lexicon of allowed language based on skin color
(only white people can use the term white and so on) is exceptionally
racist. Quantify the value of "race sensitive variable definition
heuristics" to the functioning of the software, or move-on and fix a
real bug or add a needed feature.
That is all.
On 6/7/20 12:13 PM, Charles Sprickman wrote:
On Jun 7, 2020, at 2:03 PM, vi...@vheuser.com wrote:
Why not take it off this list and contact the developers?
Users can't make small changes.
Enough already.
The intersection of “this is meaningless politics, stop being such a carelord”
and “shield my eyes from further discussion of this nonsense” is fascinating.
On 2020/06/07 12:59 PM, Pau Amma wrote:
On 2020-06-07 18:44, Norton Allen wrote:
[undeserved snippage]
Someone has suggested that we make a small change, a change that Black
people have said would make them feel better, and all we can do is
argue that making that change would be too difficult, unnecessary,
ineffective or etymologically inaccurate. Is that how you respond when
a neighbor asks a favor? Heck, is that how you respond when faced with
a technical challenge? Or do you stop for a minute to think about the
problem, how it might be manifested in different situations or for
different people, and start to try to figure out what you can do to
help?
*standing ovation* Thank you for posting this.
